THE     CENTURY   BIBLE    HANDBOOKS 

The  Early  Church 

REV.  R,  F.  HORTON,  D.  D. 


/a. . 


PRINCETON,  N.  J. 


# 


BS  417  .C46  v.9 

Horton,  Robert  F.  1855-1934. 

The  early  church 


CENTURY  BIBLE  HANDBOOKS 

General  Emtor 
Principal  WALTER  F.  ADENEY,  M.A.,  D.D, 


THE   EARLY   CHURCH 


THE  EARLY  CHURCH 


DEC  12  1910 


y/      BY 

ROBERT  F.  HORTON,  M.A.,  D.D. 

FORMERLY    FELLOW   OF    NEW   COLLEGE,    OXFORD 


HODDER   AND   STOUGHTON 

NEW   YORK 

1909 


CONTENTS 


CHAP. 


PAGE 


I.    THE    WORD    "CHURCH"    IN    THE    GOSPELS           .  I 

II.    THE    PRIMITIVE    COMMUNITIES            ...  25 

III.  DEVELOPMENT    IN    THE    NEW   TESTAMENT            .  55 

IV.  THE    SUB-APOSTOLIC    DEVELOPMENT            .            .  79 
V.    THE    FIRST    NOTE     OF     THE     CHURCH     OF    THE 

NEW    TESTAMENT I05 

VI.    THE  SECOND  NOTE  OF  THE  CHURCH,  BROTHER- 
HOOD              129 

VII.    THE   CATHOLIC    CHURCH             .            .             .            .  1 52 

INDEX  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .177 


THE    EARLY    CHURCH 

CHAPTER   I 

THE    WORD    "CHURCH"    IN    THE   GOSPELS 

§  i.  When  the  word  "  church,"  or  in  Greek,  "ecclesia," 
first  meets  us  in  the  New  Testament,  it  is  already  a 
Biblical  word  with  an  established  meaning.  Naturally 
we  read  into  the  word  all  the  associations  which  have 
gathered  round  it  in  the  course  of  the  Christian  centuries  ; 
and  it  is  quite  legitimate  to  do  so,  for  the  oak  is  implicit 
in  the  acorn.  But  it  is  well,  before  reading  into  the  word 
what  the  future  elicited  from  it,  to  grasp  firmly  what  the 
past  had  contributed  to  it. 

If  our  first  Gospel  is  correct  in  saying  that  Jesus  Him- 
self used  the  word — and  some  doubt  rests  on  it,  because 
it  is  not  confirmed  by  the  other  three  Gospels — it  is  more 
than  likely  that  the  word  He  used  was  not  the  Greek 
"ecclesia,"  but  the  Aramaic  equivalent.  We  must 
trace  the  word  in  the  Old  Testament  writings ;  and  re- 
membering how  familiar  He  was  with  them,  we  obtain 
the  first  light  on  what  He  meant  when  He  said :  "  On 


THE    EARLY    CHURCH 


this  rock  will  I  build  my  church"  (Matt.  xvi.  18),  or  "If 
he  refuse  to  hear  the  church  also,  let  him  be  unto  thee 
as  the  Gentile"  (Matt,  xviii.  17).  We  must  not  read 
back  into  the  word  what  has  grown  out  of  it,  until  we 
are  sure  that  we  find  in  it  what  He  found.  For  in  this 
as  in  other  matters  the  corruptions  of  the  present 
are  corrected  by  referring  to  the  past.  The  connection 
of  the  word  with  the  Old  Testament,  lost  to  the  Eng- 
lish reader,  is  recovered  by  the  reader  of  the  Greek 
Bible.  The  word  "  ecclesia  "  which  occurs  in  the  New 
Testament  one  hundred  and  fifteen  times,  occurs  in  the 
Greek  Old  Testament  (LXX)  seventy-six  times,  or  in 
some  readings  seventy-seven;  and  if  we  may  add  the 
twenty  times  of  the  Apocrypha,  we  may  say  that  the 
increased  use  of  the  word  "ecclesia"  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment, as  compared  with  the  Old,  is  represented  by  the 
proportion  of  a  hundred  and  fifteen  to  ninety-seven. 
When  Jesus,  therefore,  or  if  Jesus,  used  the  word,  in 
Greek  or  Aramaic,  speaking  to  a  Palestinian  audience, 
familiar  with  the  Old  Testament,  He  conveyed,  and 
must  have  intended  to  convey,  a  meaning  which  was 
already  settled  by  ancient  usage. 

In  the  LXX  the  Greek  word  "  ecclesia "  is  used  to 
translate  a  Hebrew  word,  which  by  an  odd  accident  is 
very  similar  in  sound,  qahal.  In  the  vast  majority  of 
instances  it  is  qahal  itself  which  lies  behind  the  Greek  ; 
in  five  cases  it  is  a  modification  of  the  Hebrew  word ; 
and  in  one  case,  I.  Chron.  xxviii.  2,  the  LXX  say  that 
David  stood  up  in  the  midst  of  the  "  ecclesia,"  though  the 
Hebrew  has  no  equivalent  expression  at  all.  The  Hebrew 
qahal  is  commonly  rendered  "  congregation."     It  is  the 


"CHURCH"    IN    THE    GOSPELS      3 

general  assembly  of  Israel,  as  it  was  gathered  by  Moses 
or  Solomon  or  Ezra,  the  whole  community  of  the  Lord's 
people  in  the  Theocracy. 

Now,  to  put  the  English  reader  into  possession  of 
the  Old  Testament  presuppositions  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment word  "  ecclesia "  or  church,  a  careful  study  of 
the  ninety-seven  passages  in  which  "  ecclesia  "  occurs 
would  be  necessary.  To  render  this  study  possible  we 
may  point  out  in  the  English  Bible  where  the  Greek 
word  is  latent. 

The  earliest  instance  is  peculiarly  interesting  for  this 
reason :  we  shall  have  to  trace  the  connection  between 
the  Early  Church  and  the  Jewish  synagogue ;  and  the  first 
time  that  the  word  "ecclesia"  occurs  in  the  Bible  it  is 
actually  joined  with  the  word  "  synagogue " ;  for  Lev. 
viii.  3  reads  in  the  Greek,  "  Assemble  thou  all  the  syna- 
gogue of  the  ecclesia."  That  is  the  designation  of  the 
congregation  of  Israel  gathered  at  the  door  of  the  tent 
of  meeting.  The  next  occurrence  of  the  word  which  we 
should  notice  is  in  I.  Sam.  xix.  20,  where  the  "ecclesia" 
is  not  the  whole  assembly  of  Israel,  but  the  company  of 
prophets  prophesying.  Thus  early  in  the  Bible  is  the 
suggestion  of  that  church  assembly  which  is  depicted  in 
the  first  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians.  A  third  instance 
presents  the  church  as  a  worshipping  congregation.  This 
is  Psalm  xxvi.  12,  with  Psalm  lxviii.  26:  "In  the  con- 
gregations (churches)  will  I  bless  the  Lord,"  and  "  Bless 
ye  God  in  the  congregations." 

In  Deuteronomy  and  Joshua  the  qahal  or  "  ecclesia  "  is 
sometimes  the  assembly  gathered  together  to  hear  the 
word  of  the  Lord  (Deut.  xviii.  16,  xxxi.  30;  Joshua  viii.  35), 


THE    EARLY    CHURCH 


sometimes  the  whole  community  of  Israel,  conceived 
as  a  church-nation  (Deut.  xxiii.  i,  2,  3,  8). 

In  Judges,  in  accordance  with  the  disturbed  times 
which  the  book  describes,  the  assembly  is  a  church- 
militant,  the  "ecclesia"  is  the  muster  of  the  folk  for 
battle  (Judges  xx.  2,  xxi.  5,  8).  It  is  the  same  in  I.  Sam. 
xvii.  47,  where  David  wins  his  victory  over  Goliath  in 
the  presence  of  the  "  ecclesia." — In  the  peaceful  times 
of  Solomon  the  church  is  again  the  worshipping  assembly, 
dedicating  the  new  house  of  prayer  (I.  Kings  viii.  14,  22, 
55>  65)?  though  in  the  break-up  of  the  congregation 
(ver.  65)  the  "ecclesia"  continues  to  be  the  whole 
community  of  the  Lord's  people. 

In  the  Book  of  Chronicles,  the  book  which  repre- 
sents the  later  usages  of  the  Jewish  Church,  the  word 
"ecclesia"  is  of  very  frequent  occurrence.  In  fact, 
forty  out  of  the  seventy-seven  instances  are  found  in 
Chronicles  and  the  connected  works,  Ezra  and  Nehe- 
miah.  Here  we  are  to  think  of  the  whole  assembly  of 
Israel,  ideally  conceived  as  a  church  under  the  presi- 
dency of  David,  or  under  the  anxious  leadership  of  the 
men  of  the  restoration,  Ezra  and  Nehemiah.  The 
church  is  assembled  to  bring  back  the  ark  (I.  Chron. 
xiii.  2,  4),  or  to  receive  the  last  charge  of  David 
(I.  Chron.  xxviii.  8)  and  to  worship  with  him  before 
he  departs  (xxix.  1,  10,  20).  Again  it  assembles  to 
establish  Solomon  (II.  Chron.  i.  3,  5),  and  as  in  the 
older  narrative  of  I.  Kings,  to  dedicate  the  Temple  and 
to  receive  the  blessing  of  the  pious  king  (II.  Chron. 
vi.  3,  12,  13);  breaking  upas  a  church  assembly  only 
to  continue  as  a  church-nation  (vii.   8).     The  church 


"CHURCH"    IN     THE    GOSPELS      5 

under  Jehoshaphat  is  again  in  arms  (II.  Chron.  xx.  5,  15), 
and  under  the  guidance  of  the  priest  Jehoiada  it  acts 
as  a  political  assembly  (xxiii.  3).  In  chap,  xxviii.  14,  it 
is  the  church-state.  In  chap.  xxix.  23,  28,  31,  32,  under 
Hezekiah  it  is  engaged  in  the  acts  of  the  cultus.  Again, 
in  chap,  xxx.,  as  a  church  it  ordains  the  passover 
(vers.  2,  4),  and  as  a  nation  it  keeps  it  (vers.  13,  17) 
and  prolongs  it  (vers.  23,  24,  25).  In  verse  28  the 
church  of  Israel  is  distinguished  from  the  church  of 
Judah,  but  the  church  is  one.  The  minished  church 
of  the  return  from  exile  is  42,360  (Ezra  ii.  64  :  Neh.  vii. 
66).  It  is  penitent  (x.  1.),  the  church  of  the  captivity 
(x.  8)  bent  on  reform  (x.  12,  14).  It  responds  to  its 
leader  and  teacher  (Neh.  v.  13).  It  is  the  disciplinary 
authority  (Neh.  v.  7).  It  assembles  to  hear  the  law 
(viii.  5,  18);  in  this  chapter  the  LXX  translate  "  people  " 
by  "  church,"  and  also  "  solemn  assembly."  In  chap, 
xiii.  1,  the  assembly  is  again  the  church-nation. 

In  the  poetical  and  wisdom  literature  the  u  ecclesia  " 
is  several  times  mentioned.  Job  stands  up  in  the 
assembly  and  cries  for  help  (Job  xxx.  28).  In  Proverbs 
the  assembly  is  the  church  of  warning  and  exhortation 
(Prov.  v.  14).  The  psalmists  are  always  thinking  of  the 
church  praising  the  Lord  (xxii.  23,  25  ;  xxxv.  18 ;  xl.  10  ; 
lxxxix.  5;  cvii.  32;  cxlix.  1);  but  there  is  a  congrega- 
tion of  the  wicked  too,  which  is  described  as  an 
"ecclesia"  (xxvi.  5). 

In  Lam.  i.  10,  the  church  is  the  chosen  people. 

The  prophets  rarely  mention  the  "ecclesia"  (Joel  ii. 
16  ;  Micah  ii.  5).  Ezekiel  only  uses  the  word  in  a 
strained,  metaphorical  sense,  "  a  company  ('  ecclesia ')  of 


THE    EARLY    CHURCH 


many  peoples."  Infer,  xxxi.  8,  some  readings  render 
"  company ;'  by  "  ecclesia." 

To  these  Old  Testament  instances  we  should  add  the 
twenty  which  occur  in  the  Apocrypha;  these  are  the 
more  interesting  because  the  Apocrypha  stand  in  point 
of  time  between  the  Old  Testament  and  the  New,  and 
often  help  us  to  trace  the  modifications  of  meaning 
which  words  underwent  in  the  interval.  In  Judith  the 
"ecclesia"  is  the  assembly  of  all  Israel  (vi.  22,  vii.  29, 
xiv.  6).  In  Ecclesiasticus  the  church  is  generally  the 
assembly  of  Israel  (xv.  5,  xxiii.  24),  as  the  disciplinary 
authority  (xxiv.  2),  as  the  company  of  worshippers  (xxxi. 
n,  xxxiii.  18,  xxxviii.  33,  xxxix.  10,  xliv.  15,  1.  13,  20), 
but  once  it  is  the  congregation  of  wicked  men  (xxi.  9). 
Finally,  in  I.  Mace,  the  church  is  the  ancient  con- 
gregation of  Israel  (ii.  56),  or  the  assembly  in  Macca- 
bean  times  (iv.  59,  v.  16,  xiv.  19),  or  in  one  instance 
a  special  band  of  the  faithful  (iii.  13).  Thus  the  last 
occasion  of  the  use  of  "ecclesia"  in  the  older  writings 
is  very  significant.  An  echo  is  borne  across  the  gulf 
which  lies  in  darkness  between  the  Old  Testament 
and  the  New,  words  beautiful  in  themselves,  destined 
to  receive  a  richer  and  deeper  meaning,  "ecclesia  of 
faithful  men,"  the  Church  of  Believers,  not  a  general 
and  mixed  assembly,  but,  according  to  the  Article  of 
the  Church  of  England,  "a  church  is  a  congregation 
of  faithful  men." 

It  will  be  seen,  then,  that  if  Jesus  used  the  word 
qahal,  or  "ecclesia,"  He  had  before  His  mind  a  definite 
idea,  established  in  the  usage  of  Scripture;  whatever 
addition  or  modification   He  intended  to  give  to  the 


"CHURCH"    IN    THE    GOSPELS       7 

word  in  the  development  of  His  own  institutions,  the 
word  brought  with  it  a  meaning  which  must  remain. 
An  "ecclesia"  was  a  chosen  people,  a  community  of 
those  who  believed  in  God,  that  people  of  Israel  who 
were  called  out  of  Egypt  and  established  in  Canaan, 
to  be  the  servants  and  witnesses  of  a  revealed  religion. 
Viewed  in  the  broadest  possible  way  the  whole  nation, 
men,  women,  and  children,  constituted  this  congrega- 
tion. Just  as,  in  Greek  politics,  the  "ecclesia"  of  a  city 
like  Athens  was  the  sovereign  assembly,  the  whole 
body  of  free  citizens  called  together  to  legislate  or  to 
determine  the  policy  of  the  state,  so  the  "ecclesia"  of 
Israel  was  the  whole  people,  under  the  rule  of  their 
God,  guided  by  His  servants  the  prophets,  the  judges, 
the  kings,  the  lawyers ;  for  it  must  be  remembered 
that  the  Church  of  Israel  was  the  same  in  idea  when 
Moses  was  forming  the  earliest  constitution,  when 
Joshua  was  establishing  it  in  the  Holy  Land,  when  judges 
like  Jephthah  or  Gideon  were  rallying  the  forces  for 
defence,  when  a  prophet  like  Samuel  or  a  king  like 
David  directed  the  government,  when  it  was  in  exile, 
instructed  by  Ezekiel  and  Jeremiah,  or  when,  restored 
to  Jerusalem,  it  worshipped  in  a  rebuilt  temple  under 
Ezra  the  scribe.  The  forms  varied  with  the  ages, 
with  the  sins,  with  the  discipline,  of  time,  but  the 
church  was  always  the  same. 

But  while  in  the  broadest  sense  the  church  and 
the  nation  were  identical,  there  was  an  assembly  for 
specific  purposes  which  represented  the  nation.  That 
qahalor  "  ecclesia  "  was  most  characteristically  employed, 
when  it  was  worshipping.     Praise,  sacrifice,  the  joy  of 


8  THE    EARLY    CHURCH 

the  great  festivals,  the  dedication  of  a  temple,  the 
confession  of  sin,  the  protest  of  penitence  and  amend- 
ment, were  the  true  notes  and  occupations  of  the 
church.  The  ritual  connected  with  the  Tabernacle  or 
the  Temple,  the  choric  songs  represented  in  the  Psalter, 
all  the  solemn  observances  of  religion  illustrated  its 
inner  meaning.  But  the  assembly  had  also  judicial 
and  disciplinary  functions.  Guilty  people  were  brought 
before  it  and  judged  ;  punishment  was  administered;  ex- 
pulsion from  the  congregation  was  a  penalty,  equal  to 
death.  The  assembly  was  charged  with  administering 
the  theocracy.  It  secured  the  purity  of  the  worship,  and 
restrained  the  excesses  of  individuals.  So  far  as  the  Law 
was  written  it  preserved  the  Code ;  so  far  as  it  was  cus- 
tomary or  traditional,  it  applied  the  principles  to  new  cases. 

It  does  not  appear  how  the  Assembly  which  repre- 
sented the  whole  nation  was  constituted.  Ideally  there 
was  no  distinction  between  assembly  and  people :  the 
same  term,  congregation  or  church,  is  applied  to  both. 
It  is  assumed  that  the  assembly  is  the  people.  In  the 
service  of  God,  or  in  the  administration  of  law,  or  in 
the  determination  of  policy,  the  nation  acts  through 
the  assembly.  This  was  the  qahal,  the  "  ecclesia,"  the 
church,  with  which  Jesus  was  familiar. 

§  2.  But  now,  before  we  go  further,  it  is  necessary 
to  face  the  question,  whether  we  have  any  authentic 
evidence  that  our  Lord  employed  the  word  "church" 
at  all.  Where  a  narrative  is  common  to  two  or  three 
of  the  Gospels,  and  the  several  accounts  run  very  closely 
together,  the  intrusion  of  a  singular  episode  or  ele- 
ment in  one  cannot  but  have  the  appearance  of  a  later 


"CHURCH"    IN    THE    GOSPELS       9 

interpolation,  unless  there  can  be  found  independent 
evidence  or  probability  to  confirm  it.  Now  the  passage 
(Matt.  xvi.  17-19)  in  which  the  word  "church"  occurs 
in  the  mouth  of  Jesus,  is  just  one  of  those  passages 
which,  when  the  narratives  are  placed  in  parallel  columns, 
seem  like  interpolations.  Take  Dr.  Wright's  "Synopsis 
of  the  Gospels  in  Greek,"  p.  80 ;  here  is  what  he  calls 
the  Marcan  Cycle,  that  main  body  of  the  Gospel 
story,  which  is  commonly  thought  to  be  nearest  its 
original  form  in  Mark,  but  which  appears,  with  slight 
modifications  in  Matthew  and  in  Luke. 

Looking  at  the  parallel  columns  you  see  that  Peter's 
confession  is  given,  with  very  slight  alterations,  as  if 
from  a  sure  and  established  tradition,  the  same  in  the 
three  Gospels  (Matt.  xvi.  13-16;  Mark  viii.  27-29; 
Luke  ix.  18-20).  All  the  three  also  pass  on  at  once  to 
the  first  prediction  of  the  Passion  (Matt.  xvi.  21  ;  Mark 
viii.  31  ;  Luke  ix.  22).  All  three  close  the  story  of 
the  confession  with  the  injunction  of  silence  (Matt. 
xvi.  20;  Mark  viii.  30;  Luke  ix.  21).  But  now 
Matthew,  between  the  confession  and  the  injunction, 
inserts  the  words :  "  And  Jesus  answered  and  said  unto 
him,  Blessed  art  thou,  Simon  Bar-jonah :  for  flesh  and 
blood  hath  not  revealed  it  unto  thee,  but  my  Father 
which  is  in  heaven.  And  I  also  say  unto  thee,  that  thou 
art  Peter,  and  upon  this  rock  I  will  build  my  church ; 
and  the  gates  of  Hades  shall  not  prevail  against  it. 
I  will  give  unto  thee  the  keys  of  the  kingdom  of 
heaven :  and  whatsoever  thou  shalt  bind  on  earth  shall 
be  bound  in  heaven :  and  whatsoever  thou  shalt  loose 
on  earth  shall  be  loosed  in  heaven"  (vers.   17-19). 


THE    EARLY    CHURCH 


Whence  did  the  Evangelist  derive  these  words  ?  Why 
does  Mark  omit  them?  If,  as  is  now  commonly  sup- 
posed, Mark's  Gospel  is  the  record  of  Peter's  preach- 
ing, how  comes  it  that  Peter  passed  over  words  which 
had  for  him  so  vast  a  personal  significance? — Why 
does  Luke,  who  had  before  him  a  great  variety  of 
Gospel  narratives,  and  had  traced  the  course  of  all 
things  accurately  from  the  first,  in  order  to  establish 
the  certainty  of  Christian  teaching  (Luke  i.  1-5),  omit 
this  saying  of  Jesus  which,  if  it  had  been  uttered  by 
Him,  would  have  been  fundamental  and  vital?  And 
even  John  adds  to  the  doubt,  for  though  he  does  not 
give  the  precise  narrative  of  the  confession  which  occurs 
in  the  Synoptics,  he  also  gives  a  confession  of  Peter, 
which  is  very  similar  to  the  one  which  they  record. 
In  John  vi.  67-68,  Peter  says:  "Lord,  to  whom  shall 
we  go?  thou  hast  the  words  of  eternal  life.  And  we 
have  believed  and  know  that  thou  art  the  Holy  One  of 
God  " — Jesus  makes  a  suitable  answer  to  this  confession, 
but  says  nothing  about  the  church  or  the  rock.  As  this 
is  evidently  John's  version  of  the  Confession  which  was 
the  starting-point,  the  foundation-stone,  of  the  church; 
and  as  it  is  generally  assumed  that  the  fourth  evange- 
list was  familiar  with  the  other  three ;  we  can  only  con- 
clude that  John  deliberately  omitted  the  remarkable 
words  addressed  to  Peter.  He  could  hardly,  therefore, 
have  attributed  to  them  a  fundamental  importance. 

The  other  writers  of  the  New  Testament  seem  to  be 
equally  ignorant  of  the  passage.  If  the  writer  of  the 
Epistle  to  the  Ephesians  had  known  it,  he  would  have 
said  that  the  church  was  built   upon  Peter ;  what  he 


"CHURCH"    IN    THE    GOSPELS      n 

actually  says  is,  "  built  upon  the  foundation  of  the 
apostles  and  prophets,  Christ  Jesus  himself  being  the 
chief  corner-stone"  (Eph.  ii.  20).  And  if  the  writer 
of  I.  Peter  had  known  it,  he  would  hardly  have  written 
I.  Pet.  ii.  4-8,  making  Christ  Himself  the  living  stone, 
on  which  Christians  are  built  up,  as  living  stones,  a 
spiritual  house,  a  holy  priesthood. 

The  passage,  then,  in  Matt.  xvi.  17-19,  must  lie 
under  the  strong  suspicion  of  representing  not  the 
actual  words  of  Jesus,  but  the  idea  which  was  attributed 
to  Him  by  His  first  followers. 

At  the  same  time  it  must  be  remembered  that  the 
Gospel  was  written  about  a.d.  65-75,  and  there  is 
not  the  least  ground  for  regarding  the  passage  as  an 
interpolation  of  a  subsequent  hand.  It  represents, 
therefore,  what  was  believed  to  be  the  thought  of  Jesus 
in  the  first  generation  after  His  death.  By  that  time 
the  word  "ecclesia"  was  in  current  use,  as  we  know 
from  St.  Paul's  letters,  Hebrews,  James,  John,  Acts, 
Revelation.  And  Mr.  Allen  in  the  International  Criti- 
cal Commentary  on  St.  Matthew  justly  says :  "  There 
is  no  difficulty  at  all  in  supposing  that  Christ  used 
some  Aramaic  phrase  or  word  which  would  signify  the 
community  or  society  of  His  disciples,  knit  together 
by  their  belief  in  His  Divine  Sonship,  and  pledged 
to  the  work  of  propagating  His  teaching"  (p.  176).1 

1  The  same  writer  says  elsewhere  (p.  lxxxv) :  "The  'Church' 
may  well  be  the  Palestinian  community  of  Jewish  Christian 
disciples  of  Christ  in  the  middle  of  the  century,  and  the  prominence 
given  to  St.  Peter  probably  reflects  his  position  in  the  Palestinian 
Church  during  that  period.      If  we  regard  the  writer  of  the  Gospel 


THE    EARLY    CHURCH 


It  will  be  seen,  therefore,  that  in  an  attempt  to  study 
the  Early  Church  it  is  very  necessary  to  understand  this 
famous  passage,  and  if,  in  the  silence  of  the  other 
evangelists,  we  cannot  be  sure  that  Jesus  used  the 
word  "  ecclesia,"  or  that  we  have  the  exact  words 
which  He  addressed  to  Peter,  we  at  least  find  here 
what  the  church  itself  in  the  very  earliest  times  under- 
stood to  be  her  Lord's  intention.  So  much  has  been 
elicited  from,  or  read  into,  these  words,  that  it  requires 
some  effort  to  understand  them  in  precisely  the  sense 
they  bore,  when  the  Temple  at  Jerusalem  was  in 
ashes,  and  the  old  Community  of  Israel  was  broken 
up,  and  apparently  annihilated. 

§  3.  The  church  which  Jesus  had  in  view  would 
necessarily  be  that  of  the  Old  Testament,  with  the 
significant  alteration  "my."  The  idea  was  familiar 
to  His  hearers,  the  congregation  of  Israel,  assembled 
now  for  worship,  now  for  the  exercise  of  judgment 
and  discipline,  now  for  government,  now  for  war. 
This  Church  of  the  Old  Testament  was  the  model, 
the  people  of  the  Lord,  existing  in  the  world  as  the 
scene  and  centre  of  the  Lord's  self-manifestation  and 
as  the  agent  of  His  will.  But  the  church  of  Jesus 
was  not  to  be  identical  with  the  older  church.  He 
intends  to  build  His  church,  and  there  is  a  new 
beginning,    a    new    foundation.      He    had    not    come 

as  a  Jewish  Christian,  and  do  not  read  into  his  record  of  Christ's 
words  ideas  which  the  later  Church  quite  naturally  found  there 
in  the  light  of  the  development  of  Christianity,  there  seems  no 
reason  to  suppose  that  he  may  not  have  written  his  book  within 
the  period  65-75  a.d." 


"CHURCH"    IN    THE    GOSPELS       13 

to  destroy ;  He  never  abolished  Judaism  ;  His  new 
building  would  only  rise  when  the  old,  by  other  hands, 
was  destroyed. 

With  the  fall  of  Jerusalem  in  a.d.  70  the  Jewish 
Church  ceased.  The  Temple  was  razed  to  the  ground, 
not  one  stone  remained  on  another.  All  the  ordinances 
of  the  Jewish  Church  had,  since  Deuteronomic  times, 
centred  in  the  one  sanctuary.  The  sacrifices,  the 
cultus,  the  annual  feasts,  could  only  be  celebrated  there. 
In  a  way  which  is  the  more  remarkable  the  more  it 
is  considered,  the  Jewish  Church  not  only  ceased  to 
be,  but  became  impossible  from  that  time  forward. 
Well  do  the  Jews  in  Jerusalem  wail  against  the  wall 
which  they  take  to  be  a  remnant  of  the  Temple 
structure.  Well  do  Zionists  plead  for  a  return  to  the 
holy  city.  Judaism,  as  it  is  presented  in  its  authori- 
tative documents,  the  Law  of  Moses,  cannot  be  carried 
out  in  practice  while  the  Mosque  of  Omar  stands  on 
the  site  of  the  Temple.  There  can  be  in  no  strict 
sense  a  "congregation  of  the  children  of  Israel." 
Jesus  was  always  keenly  aware  of  the  approaching 
dissolution.  Jew  as  He  was,  devoted  to  the  Law  and 
the  Prophets,  He  could  not  regard  with  composure 
the  passing  of  the  ancient  church.  But  evidently 
He  was  fully  and  increasingly  assured,  as  His  mission 
became  clear  to  Himself,  that  He  was  to  found  a  new 
church  in  the  place  of  the  one  that  was  passing  away. 
How  far  the  new  was  to  reproduce  the  old  He  did 
not  in  his  lifetime  attempt  to  determine.  No  one 
inquired,  and  He  did  not  volunteer  information 
about  the  things  which  we  now  desire  to  know.     His 


i4  THE    EARLY    CHURCH 

church  was  not  to  be  national ;  but  was  it  to  achieve 
an  organisation  like  that  of  ancient  Israel,  only  imperial 
instead  of  national?  Was  there  to  be  a  hierarchy 
like  that  of  Aaron  or  the  later  priesthood?  Was 
there  to  be  a  monarchical  head,  like  a  Roman  Im- 
perator,  or  Pontifex  Maximus?  Was  His  church, 
like  the  one  which  it  should  supersede,  to  be  a  body 
politic,  a  state,  maintaining  courts  of  justice  and  hosts 
armed  for  battle,  as  well  as  institutions  of  worship 
and  religious  instruction?  All  these  questions  are 
left  in  doubt,  except  so  far  as  they  are  answered 
implicitly  in  the  word  "  my,"  or  explicitly  in  the 
words  of  this  passage  which  follow. 

There  are  two  answers  to  these  questions  which 
historically  stand  in  sharp  opposition  to  one  another; 
they  may  be  called  the  Catholic  and  the  Evangelical. 
It  is  most  important  to  understand  the  two  answers 
and  the  reasons  for  them,  though  the  answer  which 
may  reconcile  them  in  a  single  solution  has  not 
yet  appeared  in  the  world.  Catholicism  moving  in 
a  gradual  progress  which  attained  to  distinctness  and 
certainty  when  the  fall  of  the  Roman  Empire  left  the 
Bishop  of  Rome  virtually  on  the  throne  of  the  Caesars, 
answered  the  question  in  this  way :  Jesus  intended 
to  found  a  great  church-state,  like  Israel  in  the 
defmiteness  and  tangibility  of  its  material  organisa- 
tion, but  unlike  Israel  in  being  universal  instead  of 
national;  He  intended  to  constitute  a  great  hierarchy 
of  priests,  and  to  secure  unity  by  appointing  always 
a  sacerdos  sacerdotum,  a  high-priest  supreme  over  all ; 
He  made  Peter  the  first  of  these  primates ;  Peter  came 


"CHURCH"    IN    THE    GOSPELS      15 

to  Rome,  and  as  primate  exercised  this  monarchical 
authority ;  the  successors  of  Peter  received  the  keys 
of  authority  from  Him,  and  the  Pope  to-day  is  the 
primate  of  Christ's  appointment.  As  the  magnificent 
idea  developed  in  the  course  of  centuries,  it  appro- 
priated this  text,  Matt.  xvi.  18,  and  made  it  the 
authority  for  the  Roman  system.  When  the  visitor  to 
St.  Peter's  at  Rome  lifts  his  eyes  to  that  vast  dome 
which  seems  almost  like  another  sky,  and  reads  all 
round  its  base  in  letters  twelve  feet  long :  Tu  es 
Petrus,  et  supra  hanc  petram  czdijicabo  ecclesiam  meant, 
nothing  seems  wanting  to  establish  the  correctness  of 
an  interpretation,  which  is  confirmed  by  so  majestic 
a  fact.  At  first  it  may  seem  almost  incredible  that 
any  other  view  could  assert  itself  against  evidence 
and  authority  so  overwhelming,  and  conversions  to 
Catholicism  seem  the  inevitable  result  of  an  argument 
vast  as  St.  Peter's. 

But  the  Evangelical  answer  to  the  questions  which 
are  raised  by  this  passage  in  St.  Matthew  was  cogent 
enough  to  produce  the  Reformation,  and  is  so  irre- 
sistible that  the  strongest  and  most  progressive  part 
of  Christendom  accepts  it  to-day.  It  is  maintained 
that  so  far  from  intending  to  found  a  strong  church- 
state  like  the  Jewish  Church,  with  a  hierarchy  and  an 
infallible  head,  it  was  this  incubus  on  life  and  growth 
which  Jesus  came  to  remove  ;  the  fall  of  Jerusalem  and 
the  dissolution  of  the  old  system  was,  in  His  view, 
a  liberation,  and  He  had  no  intention  of  re-establish- 
ing the  bondage  in  a  more  durable  form.  So  far  from 
instituting  a   priesthood  after   the  type  of  Aaron,    He 


16  THE    EARLY    CHURCH 

was  Himself  a  priest  after  the  order  of  Melchizedek, 
and  made  his  ministers,  not  priests,  but  apostles, 
prophets,  pastors,  and  teachers.  He  contemplated  not 
a  monarch  on  a  Roman  throne,  ruling  the  nations 
with  the  absoluteness  of  a  Caesar  and  the  infallibility 
of  God,  but  a  free  brotherhood  of  men,  accepting  His 
own  rule  under  the  Divine  sovereignty. 

According  to  the  Evangelical  view  the  obscurantism 
and  tyranny  of  the  Papal  Church,  the  conflicts  and 
schisms  which  it  has  engendered,  the  moral  corrup- 
tions and  relapses  into  heathenism  which  occur  under 
its  rule,  do  not  discredit  Christ,  but  only  prove 
that  Catholicism  is  a  misunderstanding  of  His  inten- 
tion. The  text  which  was,  after  some  generations, 
selected  as  the  foundation-stone  of  the  Catholic 
system,  does  not,  rightly  interpreted,  support  it  at  all. 
Even  the  visitor  to  St.  Peter's,  if  he  began  to  think, 
would  wonder  by  what  evidence  the  bishops  of  Rome 
could  be  shown  to  inherit  the  charge  given  to  Peter. 
And  pondering  the  very  words  written  in  letters  twelve 
feet  long  he  might  question  whether  they  imply  the 
commission  to  Peter  himself,  which  Catholicism  de- 
mands. If  the  words  meant  that  Christ  would  build 
His  church  on  Peter,  why  did  He  not  say :  "  Thou  art 
Peter,  on  thee  as  the  rock  will  I  build  my  church  "  ? 

It  is  clear  in  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  and  in  the 
epistles  both  of  Paul  and  Peter,  that  Peter  himself 
was  quite  unconscious  of  any  such  word  having  been 
spoken  to  him.  He  never  claims  a  papal  authority 
over  the  other  apostles  or  over  the  community  of  the 
faithful.     Nay,  strange  to  say,  it  is  the  Epistle  of  Peter 


"CHURCH"    IN    THE    GOSPELS     17 

particularly  that  represents  Peter  as  claiming  only  to 
be  a  fellow-elder  amongst  the  elders  of  the  church,  and 
as  warning  his  fellow-elders  against  the  tendency  to  lord 
it  over  the  charge  allotted  to  them.  Peter  does  not 
claim  to  be  the  chief  pastor  of  the  flock,  but  assigns 
that  title  to  the  invisible  Lord  (I.  Pet.  v.  1-4,  ii.  25). 
"On  this  rock"  therefore  did  not  mean  Peter  himself; 
the  play  on  the  word  in  the  Greek  expressly  repudiates 
such  a  view.  Rather  the  change  of  gender  shows  that 
there  is  only  a  certain  resemblance  between  Peter  and 
the  Rock ;  the  Rock  itself  is  the  Messiahship  and 
divine  Sonship  of  Jesus,  which  Peter  had  just  confessed. 
The  play  upon  petrns  and  petra  means :  "  You  have 
given  expression  to  a  revealed  truth  (v.  17),  your  name 
Petrus  suggests  a  metaphorical  name  for  it ;  it  shall 
be  the  petra  or  rock  on  which  the  church  shall  stand ; 
it  shall  be  the  central  doctrine  of  the  church's  teaching, 
the  fact  on  which  the  life  of  the  individual  and  of  the 
community  rests." 

At  the  same  time  a  position  of  authority  is  un- 
doubtedly given  to  Peter  in  v.  19;  he  is  entrusted  with 
the  power  to  bind  and  loose,  i.e.  to  forbid  and  allow, 
or  to  declare  what  is  forbidden  and  what  allowed  among 
the  members  of  the  Christian  community.1  But  im- 
mediately in  chap,  xviii.  18  this  authority  is  conferred 
on  all  those  who  believe  and  confess  as  he  had  done. 
It  is  thus  impossible  to  find  in  the  words  spoken  to 
Peter  anything  like  the  exclusive  and  particular  claim 
to  supremacy  and  infallibility  made  for  the  Popes.     If 

1  Matthew,  giving  a  list  of  the  apostles,  expressly  designates  Peter 
as  "first"  (x.  2). 

B 


THE    EARLY    CHURCH 


it  could  be  shown  that  the  Pope  inherited  precisely  the 
keys  which  were  given  to  Peter,  that  is  to  say,  if  Peter, 
the  Peter  of  the  New  Testament,  were  bishop  of  Rome, 
nothing  of  the  distinctive  authority  and  sanctity  now 
attached  to  the  Popes  would  be  recognised.  "  The  pilot 
of  the  Galilean  Lake,"  even  after  he  had  received  all 
the  honours  and  prerogatives  which  his  Lord  confirmed 
on  him,  remained  a  fellow-elder,  claiming  no  specific 
authority,  refusing  to  lord  it  over  others,  subject  to  the 
sharp  rebuke  of  Paul,  "  binding  and  loosing  "  just  like 
the  others  of  Christ's  servants,  by  declaring  the  truth 
of  Christ,  and  ministering  the  saving  grace  of  the  Gospel. 
If  the  Pope  is  Peter's  successor  he  should  be  like  Peter. 

But  the  claim  that  the  bishop  of  Rome  is  in  a  peculiar 
sense  the  successor  of  Peter,  and  the  repository  of  the 
special  promise  made  to  him,  is  one  of  those  ecclesias- 
tical fictions  which  melt  away  before  historical  inquiry. 
It  is  not  necessary  to  enter  into  an  elaborate  argument. 
If  the  chain  is  broken  at  the  beginning,  no  strength  in 
its  subsequent  links  can  cure  its  weakness.  For  two 
centuries  and  a  half  after  Peter  no  one  knew  even  in 
Rome  itself  that  the  bishop  of  Rome  claimed  to  be 
in  a  peculiar  sense  his  successor.  The  fiction  was 
a  gradual  growth,  an  afterthought ;  a  short  text  from 
Scripture  was  misapplied,  to  authenticate  a  supremacy 
which  the  bishop  of  Rome  gradually  attained  owing  to 
the  supremacy  of  Rome  itself.  The  point  may  be  made 
clear  by  noting  how  Cyprian,  in  the  middle  of  the  third 
century,  treats  the  text  Matt.  xvi.  18. 

Generally  speaking,  Cyprian  quotes  it  to  show  that  the 
bishop,   i.e.   the  minister  of  the   local   church,    is  ,tx 


"CHURCH"    IN    THE    GOSPELS     19 

authority  to  which  Christ  pointed.  Thus  in  Epistle 
xxvi.,  "Our  Lord,  whose  precepts  and  admonitions  we 
ought  to  observe,  describing  the  honour  of  a  bishop 
and  the  order  of  his  church,  speaks  in  the  Gospel,  and 
says  to  Peter :  '  I  say  unto  thee,  thou  art  Peter,'  &c. 
Thence  through  the  changes  of  time  and  successions 
the  ordering  of  bishops  and  the  plan  of  the  church  flows 
onwards ;  so  that  the  church  is  founded  upon  the 
bishops,  and  every  act  of  the  church  is  controlled  by 
these  same  rules."  Again  in  Epistle  xxxix.  he  says : 
"  There  is  one  God,  and  Christ  is  one,  and  there  is  one 
church,  and  one  chair  founded  upon  the  rock  by  the 
Lord."  What  is  that  one  chair  ?  The  Roman  See  ? 
Not  at  all ;  it  is  only  the  episcopal  authority  in  the  local 
church.  The  tenor  of  the  teaching  makes  it  quite  clear 
that  in  Treatise  iii.  §  4,  on  the  Unity  of  the  Church,  the 
clauses,  rightly  bracketed  in  the  Ante-Nicene  Christian 
Library  edition  of  Cyprian,  which  suggest  the  Roman 
See  as  the  foundation  of  the  church,  are  spurious. 
Cyprian,  writing  to  Cornelius,  bishop  of  Rome  a.d.  251- 
253,  addresses  him  only  as  "  dearest  brother,"  assumes 
even  an  air  of  patronage,  and  mentions  the  text  without 
a  hint  that  it  has  a  peculiar  reference  to  the  Roman  See, 
Epistle  liv.  §7.  A  little  later  he  writes  about  Stephen, 
bishop  of  Rome  :  "  Since  you  have  desired  that  what 
Stephen  our  brother  replied  to  my  letters  should  be 
brought  to  your  knowledge,  I  have  sent  you  a  copy  of 
this  reply ;  on  the  reading  of  which,  you  will  more  and 
more  observe  his  error  in  endeavouring  to  maintain  the 
cause  of  heretics  against  Christians  and  against  the 
as'  .wrch  of  God"  (lxxiii.).     In  the  middle  of  the  third 


2o  THE    EARLY    CHURCH 

century  every  bishop  was  a  pope,  and  indeed  the 
Roman  clergy  write  to  Cyprian  under  that  name  : 
"  To  pope  Cyprian,  the  presbyters  and  deacons  abiding 
at  Rome,  greeting  "  (Epistle  xxx.).  The  Roman  Church 
had  a  natural  pre-eminence,  because  Rome  was  the 
capital  of  the  civilised  world ;  and  the  bishop  of  Rome 
inherited  that  metropolitan  power  in  a  higher  degree 
than  ever  when  the  seat  of  the  Empire  was  removed 
to  Constantinople.  But  more  than  two  centuries  after 
Christ  orthodox  churchmen  failed  to  recognise  the 
transmission  of  Peter's  authority  in  any  peculiar  sense 
to  the  line  of  Roman  bishops.  Cyprian,  already  rooted 
in  the  error  that  the  text  makes  bishops,  and  not  the 
truth  of  Christ's  divine  Sonship,  the  foundation  of  the 
church,  has  not  yet  arrived  at  the  later  error,  that 
He  made  the  bishops  of  Rome  in  perpetuity  the 
foundation.1 

We  may  therefore  stand  fast  in  the  criticism  of  the 
Catholic  view  which  was  made  in  the  Reformation.  We 
may  take  the  text  in  the  meaning  which  it  would  sug- 
gest, if  we  approached  it  from  the  past,  and  did  not 
look  back  upon  it  from  the  present.  Nay,  it  must  be 
repeatedly  urged  that  it  is  a  dangerous  method  to 
read  into  texts  the  results  which  have  to  all  appear- 
ance sprung  out  of  them ;  that  is  to  consecrate  all  errors 
and  to  destroy  our  standard  of  correction.  We  are 
bound  to  recognise  the  grave  mischief  and  corruption  of 
the  Roman   Church  ;    the  one   hope  of  correcting  the 

1  Even  St.  Gregory  at  the  end  of  the  sixth  century  claims  for 
the  Roman  See  an  authority,  over  against  Constantinople,  only  in 
conjunction  with  the  Patriarchates  of  Alexandria  and  Antioch. 


"CHURCH"  IN    THE    GOSPELS     21 

evil  is  to  read  the  Gospel  with  unbiassed  judgment,  and 
to  find  not  what  it  means  now  to  those  who  are  warped 
with  dogmatic  prejudice,  but  what  it  originally  meant. 

The  Reformation  saw  that  this  text  had  been  misread 
and  misused  for  at  least  a  thousand  years ;  it  ventured 
to  reconsider  it  and  to  search  out  its  true  meaning, 
which  is  this  :  Christ  did  not  found  His  church  on 
Peter,  nor  on  any  man,  or  order  of  men,  but  on  the 
recognition  of  Himself  as  the  divine  Son,  a  recognition 
which  it  was  Peter's  distinction  to  be  the  first  to  make. 
The  church  He  founded  therefore  was  not  a  state,  a 
hierarchy,  a  coercive  authority,  a  kingdom  of  this  world, 
but  a  spiritual  society,  consisting  of  those  who,  by  a 
faith  like  Peter's  in  Jesus  Christ  Himself,  are  built  into 
Him  as  lively  stones.  The  church's  power  to  bind 
and  loose,  to  retain  or  remit  sins,  resulted  from  the 
living  faith  in  Him.  Whoever  was  united  with  Him 
would  acquire,  even  in  his  individual  capacity,  some 
of  this  power  of  the  keys;  but  the  society  of  those 
who  had  this  faith  would  exercise  a  surer  and  more 
effectual  guidance  and  discipline.  The  old  church  of 
Israel,  the  prototype  of  Catholicism,  was  vanishing 
away.  The  new  church,  Christ's  church,  was  not 
made  after  its  similitude ;  it  was  a  new  creation  alto- 
gether, not  carnal  or  material  or  worldly,  but  ethical 
and  spiritual,  belonging  to  that  Kingdom  of  Heaven 
which  it  was  to  realise  on  earth. 

A  society  formed,  not  by  race  or  locality,  not  by  out- 
ward ceremonies  or  visible  badges,  but  by  a  personal 
relation  to  Christ  Himself,  united  only  in  Him,  existing 
only  to  express  Him,  and  to  be  His  organ  of  activity 


THE    EARLY    CHURCH 


in  the  world,  such  a  society  spreading  over  the  whole 
earth,  localised  in  convenient  assemblies  in  every  place, 
would  nourish  and  train  its  own  members,  would  draw 
all  mankind  into  its  bosom,  and  would  be  impregnable 
against  all  the  assaults  of  Hades. 

But  this  general  view  of  the  church  as  originally  con- 
ceived will  prepare  us  for  the  more  particular  view  which 
is  presented  in  the  only  other  passage  of  the  Gospels 
where  the  word  "  church  "  occurs,  Matt,  xviii.  1 7. 

§  4.  The  passage  Matt,  xviii.  15-17  is  peculiar 
to  the  first  Gospel;  it  has  no  parallel  in  the  other 
three.  Dr.  Wright,  therefore,  includes  it  in  what  he 
calls  the  anonymous  fragments.  It  does  not  belong 
to  the  Marcan  Cycle  or  to  the  Matthaean  Logia.  But 
there  is  no  reason  for  questioning  that  it  is  a  saying 
of  Jesus.  It  does  not  come  under  the  doubt  which 
attaches  to  chap.  xvi.  18,  where  three  parallel  narratives 
are  side  by  side,  and  Matthew  inserts  something  which 
is  deliberately  omitted  by  the  earlier  Mark  and  the  later 
Luke. 

In  our  passage  we  see  the  church  in  being.  If 
Jesus  intended  to  found  a  congregation  of  the  faithful, 
including  multitudes  in  all  lands,  and  ultimately  even  all 
mankind,  in  the  first  instance  the  congregation  would 
be  a  little  company  in  a  single  place,  perhaps  not  more 
than  two  or  three.  Whether  the  "  church  "  here  means 
this  small  original  community  in  Jerusalem,  or  any  local 
community  anywhere,  is  not  made  plain.  That  is  a 
point  which  was  only  determined  by  subsequent  events. 
From  Acts  and  the  Pauline  Epistles,  as  we  shall  see, 
we  gather  that  the  local  assembly  everywhere  had  the 


"CHURCH"    IN    THE    GOSPELS     23 

marks  of  the  church,  and  exercised  the  judicial  and 
disciplinary  functions  which  are  here  implied.  But 
regarding  the  words  as  a  distinct  saying  to  the  disciples 
in  the  days  of  his  flesh,  we  are  only  entitled  to  read 
out  of  them  this  idea  :  they  who  agreed  in  the  con- 
fession of  Peter  in  chap.  xvi.  18  were  already  His 
church.  As  he  on  confession  received  the  power 
to  bind  and  loose  (xvi.  19),  so  they  all  on  confession 
received  the  same  power  (xviii.  18);  they  constituted 
a  compact  society,  a  court  of  final  appeal  for  each 
member  of  the  community.  Their  authority  depended 
on  the  fact  that  when  they  were  gathered  together  in 
the  name  of  Jesus,  He  Himself  would  always  be  in 
the  midst  of  them.  He  made  the  fellowship,  and  He 
empowered  it. 

The  particular  case  of  the  offending  brother,  who 
will  not  be  reconciled,  and  must  finally  be  brought 
to  the  whole  society  and  expelled,  serves  to  introduce 
the  first  picture  of  the  church  in  being;  not  that  the 
exercise  of  discipline  is  the  chief  work  of  the  church ; 
the  prayer,  the  brotherhood,  the  sense  of  Christ's 
presence,  are  the  essence  of  it  all ;  but  where  the 
essential  factors  are  present,  the  discipline  is  valid  and 
salutary.  The  object  is  to  gain  the  brother,  but  the 
object  is  achieved  through  wholesome  severity. 

If,  then,  chap.  xvi.  18  gives  us  the  vast  shadowy 
outline  of  the  Church  of  Christ  as  the  whole  congre- 
gation of  those  who  believe  in  Him  and  confess  Him, 
the  world-wide  society,  spiritually  united,  constituting 
an  impregnable  building,  against  which  the  gates  of 
Hades   cannot   prevail,    this    passage,   chap,    xviii.    17, 


24  THE    EARLY    CHURCH 

shows  us  the  society  actually  coming  into  existence ;  it 
is  small,  simple,  and  unpretentious ;  but  as  the  tree  is 
potentially  contained  in  the  seed,  we  may  see  clearly 
in  this  first  sketch  of  the  nascent  church  the  ever- 
lasting essentials,  those  traits  and  marks  which  will 
for  ever  distinguish  the  church.  Here  in  the  mind 
of  her  Lord  is  the  church  as  He  conceives  it,  and 
we  can  very  confidently  affirm  that,  unless  it  retains 
these  essential  characteristics,  it  will  cease  to  be  the 
church.  Let  us  recapitulate  them  and  group  them 
in  order,  so  that  we  may  obtain  from  the  mind  of  the 
Founder  the  definition  of  His  church. 

(i)  It  is  a  compact  society,  (2)  composed  of  those 
who  really  believe  in  Him,  (3)  held  together  by  love 
so  deep  and  living  that  it  cannot  tolerate  within  itself 
even  a  quarrel,  (4)  assured  in  its  assemblies  of  the 
actual  living  presence  of  Jesus  Christ,  (5)  empowered 
to  offer  prayers  which  shall  be  answered,  (6)  authorised 
to  declare  the  truth,  in  its  corporate  capacity,  as  well 
as  in  its  individual  members,  to  bind  and  loose,  to 
remit  and  retain. 

Ubi  Christus,  ibi  ecclesia.  Christ  is  in  the  midst  of 
those  who  believe  in  Him,  love  one  another,  and  pray 
together.  This  is  the  essence  of  the  church.  What- 
ever organisation  or  development  supervenes,  it  cannot 
be  of  the  essence,  or  alter  the  essence.  Faith  in  Christ 
and  love  to  one  another  make  the  church. 


CHAPTER   II 

THE   PRIMITIVE   COMMUNITIES 

§  i.  The  sketch  of  the  church  in  being  given  by  our 
Lord  in  Matt,  xviii.  15-20  is  filled  up  by  the  earliest 
intimations  we  have  of  the  infant  church  in  the  New 
Testament.  For  it  is  the  local  congregation,  rather 
than  the  qahal,  which  first  emerges  into  view.  In 
the  primitive  institutions  we  doubtless  see  the  result 
of  the  Lord's  own  directions;  we  certainly  feel  the 
breath  of  His  Spirit.  And  yet  there  is  some  evidence 
to  show  that  the  first  communities  took  shape  on  the 
model  of  the  synagogue,  which  was  the  most  active 
and  ubiquitous  institution  of  Judaism.  If  the  qahal 
was  the  pattern  of  the  church  in  the  larger  sense, 
the  synagogue  was  naturally  the  pattern  of  the  church 
in  the  narrower  and  local  sense.  In  the  LXX  ecclesia 
and  synagogue  are  almost  interchangeable  terms,  and, 
as  we  saw,  they  were  sometimes  combined  in  the 
form  "  the  synagogue  of  the  church."  Evidently  where 
the  converts  were  all  of  Jewish  origin  the  church  was 
called  the  synagogue  (Jas.  ii.  2).  And  as  late  as  the 
beginning  of  the  fourth  century  we  find  a  church  of 
the  anti-Judaistic  Marcionites  called  a  synagogue  of  the 


26  THE    EARLY    CHURCH 

Marcionites.1  In  the  Gentile  communities  the  term 
"ecclesia"  was  from  the  first  preferred,  and  the  far- 
reaching  influence  of  Paul  subordinated  the  Jewish  to 
the  Gentile  analogy. 

Throughout  the  Jewish  world  in  the  first  century 
the  synagogue  was  the  centre  of  religious  life.  Every 
town  and  village  had  its  synagogue ;  in  large  towns 
there  were  many.  The  idle  talk  of  the  Talmud  says 
there  were  in  Jerusalem  four  hundred  and  eighty.  In 
some  cases  the  synagogue  was  a  noble  building ;  the 
ruins  of  the  supposed  synagogue  on  the  site  of  Caper- 
naum at  Tel  Hum  indicate  a  great  structure  of  approved 
Grseco-Roman  design.  But  frequently  the  synagogue 
would  be  a  small  building,  quite  unpretentious,  like 
a  chapel  in  rural  England.2  The  primary  purpose  of 
the  synagogue  was  the  teaching  of  the  Law.  The  rolls 
were  kept  in  a  cabinet,  and  a  pulpit  in  the  centre 
gave  the  reader  a  vantage-ground  that  he  might  be 
heard.  The  synagogue  was  everywhere  under  the 
control  of  the  Elders  of  the  Jewish  Community ;  there 

1  Schiirer,  "The  Jewish  People  in  the  Time  of  Jesus  Christ," 
Div.  ii.  vol.  ii.  p.  69. 

2  It  is  possible  that  the  smaller  synagogues  were  called  by 
the  Greek  word  proseuche,  which  is  translated  in  Acts  xvi.  13 
"  a  place  of  prayer."  Thus  among  the  Egyptian  papyri,  in  one  dated 
A.D.  113,  the  water-rate  is  assessed  on  the  "rulers  of  the  proseuche 
of  Theban  Jews  128  drachmae  a  month."  The  addition  "item  for 
the  eucheion  "  raises  the  question  whether  the  eucheion,  or  prayer- 
house,  was  the  synagogue  as  a  building,  and  the  proseuche  was 
the  synagogue  as  a  community,  the  distinction  which  we  make 
between  "  church  "  or  "  chapel  "  as  a  building  and  Church  as  the 
society  of  believers.     {Expository   Times,  xix.  41.) 


PRIMITIVE    COMMUNITIES       27 

was  no  congregational  life  or  authority.  But,  strange 
to  say,  there  were  no  stated  ministers  for  the  con- 
duct of  the  services;  the  Archisynagogue — there  might 
be  more  than  one — was  responsible  for  appointing 
the  reader  or  speaker,  and  for  keeping  order  in 
the  assembly ;  the  minister  had  the  humbler  task  of 
keeping  the  sacred  rolls ;  to  which  function  were 
added  less  agreeable  duties,  such  as  the  infliction  of 
punishment. 

In  the  morning  service  on  the  Sabbath,  after  the 
Shemah  (Deut.  vi.  4-9,  xi.  13-21 ;  Num.  xv.  32-41)  and 
prayer,  to  which  the  people  said  Amen,  a  portion  of  the 
Law  was  read.  Then  a  portion  of  the  prophets  was 
read  (Luke  iv.  17  ;  Acts  xiii.  15).  Then  there  was  an  ex- 
position given  by  the  preacher  (darshan)  for  the  day. 
There  was  a  briefer  service  later  on,  towards  sunset. 
There  does  not  appear  to  have  been  any  singing,  though 
trombones  and  trumpets  were  indispensable  instruments 
in  the  worship,  the  former  for  New  Year's  Day,  the  latter 
for  the  ordinary  feasts.1  There  were  two  constant 
features  of  the  synagogue  life  which  obviously  influenced 
the  practice  of  the  early  church,  the  collection  of  alms 
for  the  poor,  and  the  exercise  of  discipline.  For  alms 
there  were  special  receivers  and  distributors  appointed ; 
for  the  collection  there  must  be  two  men,  for  the  dis- 
tribution three.  As  for  the  discipline,  such  a  narrative 
as  John  xii.  42  shows  how  formidable  the  excommunica- 
tion from  the  synagogue  was  ;  there  was  a  temporary 
excommunication,  but  in  extreme  cases  there  was  a  final 

1   Schurer,  /.<:.,  p.  75. 


28  THE    EARLY    CHURCH 

and  irreversible  excommunication,  which  is  represented 
by  the  Greek  word  "  anathema"  (Rom.  xi.  3 ;  i  Cor.  xii. 
xvi.  22). 

The  synagogue  was  always  built,  if  possible,  by  running 
water,  that  worshippers  might  perform  the  necessary  ab- 
lutions before  entering. 

Wherever  the  Gospel  was  preached,  in  New  Testament 
times,  the  synagogue  was  already  in  existence.  And 
when  believers  in  Christ  began  to  gather  in  simple  com- 
munities, their  ideas  and  practices  were  naturally  deter- 
mined by  the  synagogues  from  which  many  of  them  came, 
and  which  all  of  them  knew. 

§  2.  For  our  knowledge  of  the  first  Christian  com- 
munities, we  are  dependent  on  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles 
and  the  epistles.  Chronologically  the  epistles  come 
first ;  some  at  any  rate  of  the  epistles  of  Paul  must  have 
been  written  considerably  earlier  than  the  Acts.  And 
yet  we  have  good  reason  to  believe  that  Acts  gives  us 
the  earliest  picture  of  the  church.  Paul  uses  the  word 
"  church  "  as  one  already  familiar.  The  churches  which 
he  established  grew  up  on  a  well-recognised  principle. 
And  this  fact  presupposes  a  movement  which  we  can 
only  study  in  the  earlier  chapters  of  the  Acts.  The 
historical  value  and  credibility  of  the  later  narrative  of 
the  Acts,  where  the  presence  of  an  eye-witness  is  in- 
dicated in  many  indubitable  ways,  would  not  necessarily 
go  back  to  the  early  events,  at  which  the  writer,  Luke, 
could  not  have  been  present ;  and  there  are  certain 
elements  in  these  chapters  which  suggest  a  legendary 
colour.  But  for  the  purpose  of  finding  the  nature  of  the 
primitive  Christian  community,  the  source  is  not  only 


PRIMITIVE    COMMUNITIES       29 

the  best  we  have,  but  is  also  sufficiently  sure ;  the  main 
features  are  confirmed  by  the  epistles,  while  certain 
features  which  were  only  of  temporary  continuance 
suggest  that  we  are  touching  veracious  records. 

Our  first  task,  therefore,  is  to  examine  the  characteristics 
of  the  church  in  Jerusalem,  as  it  came  into  being  after 
the  departure  of  the  Lord  and  the  descent  of  the  Holy 
Ghost.  But  before  doing  so  we  may  note  how  Acts 
uses  the  word  "ecclesia"  still  in  the  more  general  sense 
of  "  assembly,"  and  probably,  therefore,  when  the  word 
is  applied  to  the  assembly  of  Christians  it  is  still  to  be 
understood  in  its  original  meaning ;  it  is  only  by  degrees 
that  it  acquires  the  significance  of  "church,"  as  we 
understand  it.  Thus  in  the  address  of  Stephen  before 
the  Sanhedrin  (vii.  38)  the  ancient  qahal  of  Israel  is 
called  "the  church  in  the  wilderness."  This  writer, 
therefore,  establishes  the  connection  between  the  Old 
and  New  Testaments  which  we  have  already  examined. 
When  first  he  speaks  of  the  church  in  Jerusalem  (ii.  47  ; 
in  certain  MSS.,  v.  n,  viii.  1)  he  must  have  in  mind 
the  church  under  the  Old  Covenant,  of  which  Moses 
was  the  leader.  In  chap.  xix.  32,  "ecclesia"  is  used 
again,  and  repeated,  v.  39-41,  in  the  thoroughly  Greek 
sense  of  the  popular  assembly  of  the  Greek  city.  This 
assembly  may  be  a  mere  tumult,  an  irregular  gathering 
of  the  populace,  but  it  may  be  the  lawful  (v.  39)  ordered 
meeting  of  the  citizens  who  exercised  legislative  and 
judicial  functions.  Thus  Luke, — we  may  assume  now 
that  he  is  the  writer  of  Acts, — as  much  a  Greek  as 
a  Jew,  uses  the  word  "  ecclesia "  in  its  Jewish  sense 
and  in  its   Greek   sense,  and  we  may  assume  that  as 


3o  THE    EARLY    CHURCH 

he  begins  to  use  it  in  a  specifically  Christian  sense,  he 
brings  with  him  many  suggestions  gathered  from  those 
sources. 

And  yet,  as  we  shall  presently  see,  directly  the  ecclesia 
is  used  for  the  Christian  purpose,  the  meaning  is  trans- 
formed. It  is  as  if  we  heard  Christ  say  "  My  ecclesia," 
and  "  My  "  carries  with  it  Himself,  His  Spirit,  His  rule. 
Notwithstanding  the  analogies  of  the  Jewish  qahal  or 
the  contemporary  synagogue,  notwithstanding  the  mani- 
fold suggestions  to  the  Greek  ear  of  the  ecclesia  or 
sovereign  assembly  of  the  city,  the  ecclesia  of  Christ  is 
from  the  beginning  a  thing  apart,  with  a  quality  and 
a  possibility  which  are  all  its  own.  The  things  we  have 
learnt  from  the  synagogue  or  the  Ephesian  assembly 
carry  us  but  a  little  way ;  the  essence  of  the  institution 
is  new. 

§  3.  The  reading  of  the  A.V.  in  Acts  ii.  47,  "added 
to  the  church,"  is  rejected  by  the  revisers  in  favour 
of  a  singularly  awkward  expression  which  is  supported 
by  what  are  considered  the  preponderant  MSS.  That 
awkward  expression  is  not  correctly  rendered  "  to  them  "  ; 
it  is  only  "  to  the  same."  But  while  we  lose  the  word 
"  ecclesia  "  by  this  pedantic  adhesion  to  a  fixed  use  of  the 
MSS.,  it  is  the  church  which  is  described  in  verses  41-47  ; 
and  as  the  description  of  a  community  coming  into 
spontaneous  existence  as  the  result  of  the  preaching  of 
Christ  and  the  outpouring  of  the  Spirit,  it  is  of  inestim- 
able value.  It  follows  naturally  on  Matt,  xviii.  15-20. 
The  church  which  Jesus  anticipated  is  now  for  the  first 
time  forming.  Let  us  reverently  examine  this  seed 
which  was  to  grow  to  such  proportions.     First  of  all  we 


PRIMITIVE    COMMUNITIES      31 

see  now  who  are  to  constitute  this  new  community.  In 
place  of  the  old  Israel  is  a  new  Israel  which  consists  of 
people  who  have  a  certain  inward  qualification,  a  certain 
outward  sign,  and  may  be  described  as  in  a  certain  state 
or  condition.  They  were  people  who  heard  the  word  of 
the  Gospel,  received  it,  repented,  and  believed  :  that  was 
the  inward  qualification.  They  were  baptized  :  that  was 
the  outward  sign.  And  they  were  in  a  state  of  salva- 
tion (Acts  ii.  47).  The  new  elements,  as  compared  with 
Matt.  viii.  15, 1 7,  are  the  baptism  and  the  remission  of  sins. 
These  new  elements  came  in  from  the  cross,  and  the  com- 
mission to  baptize.  Since  Jesus  spoke,  He  had  been 
crucified ;  now  it  was  possible  to  preach  the  Crucified 
One  as  the  means  of  remission  of  sins,  and  to  summon 
those  who  believed  to  baptism  in  accordance  with  His 
command.  Peter  is  here  carrying  out  his  commission  to 
bind  and  loose,  to  remit  or  retain  sin,  by  declaring  the 
good  news :  "  Repent  ye  and  be  baptized  every  one  of 
you  unto  the  remission  of  your  sins  ;  and  ye  shall  receive 
the  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost." 

It  is  greatly  to  be  wished  that  we  were  told  more 
definitely  the  function  of  baptism  in  this  process  of 
transformation  which  admits  people  of  all  languages 
and  conditions  into  the  church.  Within  two  centuries 
the  doctrine  of  baptismal  regeneration  was  accepted  : 
the  act  of  baptism  was  believed  to  produce  the  spiritual 
re-birth.  But  of  this  doctrine  we  have  no  proof  from 
these  earliest  days  of  the  church,  for  the  "  laver  of  re- 
generation "  was  as  yet  rather  the  recognition  of  a  trans- 
formation wrought  by  repentance  and  faith  in  Jesus,  than 
the  cause  which  produced  the  effect.     When    baptism 


32  THE    EARLY    CHURCH 

was  separated  from  faith  and  repentance,  and  treated  as 
in  itself  the  effective  cause  of  the  new  birth,  these  early 
days  were  left  far  behind. 

But  those  hearers  who  repented  and  believed  and 
were  baptized  were  in  a  state  of  salvation,  were  "  being 
saved."  The  new  community  was  pure  ;  it  consisted 
not  of  the  living  and  the  dead,  but  of  the  living  only. 
Born  again  of  the  water  and  of  the  Spirit,  they  were  new 
creatures  in  Christ  Jesus.  The  faith,  which  made  Peter 
the  first  member  of  the  church,  had  now  gathered  in  a 
multitude  numbered  by  thousands.  We  may  assume 
that  many  of  these  were  the  strangers  present  in  Jeru- 
salem for  the  feast  (ii.  9-1 1),  and  they  would  return  to 
their  homes,  carrying  the  new  faith.  But  those  who 
continued  in  Jerusalem  constituted  the  first  Christian 
Church.  While  the  strangers  dispersed,  carrying  the 
seeds  of  the  new  Gospel,  the  residents  in  Jerusalem  were 
engaged  unconsciously  in  laying  the  stones  of  the  church- 
structure  of  the  future.  The  community  has  not  as  yet  a 
synagogue  for  worship;  they  pray  in  the  Temple  (iii.  1), 
or  possibly  still  in  Jewish  synagogues,  to  which  they 
had  formerly  belonged.  But  they  met  daily  in  private 
houses,  or  in  open  places,  for  purposes  which  could  not 
be  completely  realised  in  the  Temple.  First  there 
was  the  teaching  of  the  apostles ;  then  there  was  the 
fellowship  which  formed  around  their  persons ;  then 
there  was  the  "  breaking  of  bread " ;  finally  there  were 
the  prayers. 

The  Apostles  here  come  in  as  the  indispensable 
teachers  of  the  young  community.  They  had  been 
with   the    Lord,   and   they    were  commanded   by   Him 


PRIMITIVE    COMMUNITIES 


33 


to  baptize  all  nations,  and  to  teach  them  what  He 
had  commanded.  They  had  in  their  minds  His  acts, 
His  words,  the  image  of  His  person ;  they  were  the 
witnesses  of  His  resurrection.  They  had  therefore  much 
to  teach.  The  teaching  which  is  now  embodied 
in  the  New  Testament  could  then  be  derived  only 
from  their  lips.  The  first  duty  of  the  church  was  to 
learn  all  about  Jesus.  It  required  a  stedfast  atten- 
dance in  the  new  school.  The  synagogue  taught  the 
Law  and  the  Prophets ;  the  church  was  to  teach  the 
Gospel. 

The  fellowship  is  essential.  From  the  first  the 
church  is  more  than  a  list  of  members ;  it  is  a  society 
of  those  who  know  and  love  and  help  one  another. 
The  fellowship  is  in  things  material  as  well  as  things 
spiritual.  Only  in  communion  with  one  another  can 
they  realise  the  idea  of  being  the  body  of  their  absent 
Lord,  an  idea  which  was  left  to  them  by  the  institution 
of  the  Supper  before  He  died.  The  breaking  of  bread, 
which  is  brought  into  emphasis  here  (Acts  ii.  42,  46) 
must  be  the  memorial  of  that  last  Supper.  Every  day 
as  they  broke  bread  in  the  house,  they  did  it  in  remem- 
brance of  Him.  It  was  not  yet  a  set  service ;  no 
ritual  was  attached  to  it.  But  living  in  daily  remem- 
brance of  Him,  whose  body  was  broken  for  them,  and 
in  spirit  eating  of  His  flesh  and  drinking  of  His 
blood,  they  made  their  meal  a  joyful  celebration  and 
symbol  of  the  truth.  The  prayers  were  not  only  those 
offered  in  the  Temple,  but  also  those  offered  in  the 
home.  And  to  the  prayers  were  added  songs  of 
praise,   at  least  so  we   may  interpret  ver.  47.     Psalms 

c 


34  THE    EARLY    CHURCH 

were  sung  in  the  Temple  worship,  if  not  in  the  syna- 
gogue ;  and  the  irrepressible  love  and  gratitude  of  those 
who  were  being  saved  would  break  out  into  hymns  of 
praise. 

It  is  expressly  stated  that  in  this  first  spontaneous 
outbreak  of  life  and  love  and  worship,  which  made  the 
infant  church,  the  people  who  did  not  themselves  be- 
lieve yet  regarded  those  who  did  with  favour. 

The  communism  which  was  adopted  in  the  enthu- 
siasm of  the  moment  was  natural  enough,  but  unfor- 
tunately we  have  no  further  notice  of  it  in  the  later 
stages  of  development.  Perhaps  the  melancholy  story 
recorded  in  chap.  v.  disheartened  the  church  from  carry- 
ing out  as  a  universal  practice  this  principle  which 
sprang  spontaneously  into  being  in  the  first  rush  of 
spiritual  joy. 

In  this  earliest  community  there  were  as  yet  no 
officials,  no  stated  ministers.  The  twelve  Apostles 
were  there,  "  continuing  stedfastly  in  prayer  and  in 
the  ministry  of  the  word  "  (vi.  4),  but  the  church  was 
a  brotherhood,  not  a  hierarchy.  The  idea  that  the 
church  rests  on  three  orders  of  ministry,  bishops, 
priests,  and  deacons,  receives  no  countenance  from  the 
story  of  its  beginning.  It  was  long  before  there  were 
bishops,  and  longer  still  before  there  were  priests. 
Deacons,  as  we  shall  presently  see,  perhaps  came 
earlier.  The  church  rests  rather,  as  we  read  in 
Ephesians,  on  the  foundation  of  Apostles  and  Prophets, 
Jesus  Christ  Himself  being  the  chief  corner  stone.  The 
Apostles  are  the  original  company  of  those  whom 
the   Lord  chose  and   trained ;  and  here  we  see  them 


PRIMITIVE    COMMUNITIES     35 

laying,  or  forming,  the  foundation  of  the  church.  The 
Prophets,  men  directly  inspired  to  utter  the  truth  of 
God,  were  an  order  which  had  never  wholly  ceased, 
from  Moses  to  John  the  Baptist ;  it  began  again  with 
such  a  preacher  as  Stephen  or  Philip,  and  is  continued 
wherever  a  preacher  ceases  to  be  a  mere  scribe  or 
lecturer  and  becomes  a  man  full  of  faith  and  of  the 
Holy  Spirit. 

The  career  of  Stephen  and  Philip  as  given  in  our 
book  (vi.-viii.  cf.  xxi.  8)  would  lead  us  to  regard 
them  as  typical  "  prophets  " ;  in  the  case  of  the  latter, 
his  daughters  received  the  mantle  of  their  father. 
But  they  come  before  us  as  two  out  of  the  seven  men 
who  were  elected  for  a  more  mundane  purpose.  These 
seven  are,  strictly  speaking,  the  first  officers  of  the 
church.  Their  method  of  appointment  or  ordination 
is  significant.  They  are  chosen  by  the  whole  com- 
munity (vi.  5),  and  when  chosen  they  are  appointed 
by  the  laying  on  of  the  hands  of  the  Apostles,  a  very 
natural  symbol.  The  Holy  Spirit  was  not  conferred 
by  the  ceremony,  for  Stephen  was  chosen  because  he 
was  already  "a  man  full  of  faith  and  of  the  Holy 
Spirit."  The  occasion  of  appointing  the  seven  is 
this :  The  church  took  over  from  the  synagogue  the 
duty  of  collecting  and  distributing  alms.  In  the 
generous  outburst  which  made  the  society  communistic, 
widows  were  supported  by  daily  gifts  ;  but  difficulties 
immediately  appeared,  the  foretaste  of  those  which 
would  render  communism  impracticable  ;  the  widows  who 
were  not  of  pure  Jewish  extraction,  but  belonged  to 
the    Hellenistic   population    of  Jerusalem,    suffered    in 


36  THE    EARLY    CHURCH 

the  daily  distribution.  The  seven  were  appointed  to 
manage  the  almsgiving ;  one  of  their  number  was  a 
Syrian  proselyte  to  Judaism,  Nicolas ;  Stephen  and 
Philip  were  Jews;  the  names  of  the  remaining  four 
imply  that  they  might  have  been  of  Greek  origin. 
The  first  ministers  of  the  church  therefore  were  agents 
of  the  church's  charity  to  its  poor  members.  The 
fact  that  the  five  remain  in  obscurity,  and  the  two 
first  are  known  from  a  ministry  quite  different  from 
that  to  which  they  were  appointed,  shows  that  the 
essential  work  of  the  church  can  be  done  in  silence, 
and  also  that  the  Spirit  determines  the  activity  of 
Christians,  without  regard  to  the  nominal  office  which 
they  hold. 

We  must  extend  our  vision  soon  beyond  Jerusalem. 
But  it  is  worth  our  while  to  follow  out  the  history 
of  this  first  community  to  the  time  (a.d.  70)  when 
Jerusalem  was  destroyed,  and  the  church  in  Jerusalem 
for  a  while  ceased  to  be.  This  history  is  suggested 
rather  than  told  in  Acts.  The  Apostles  apparently  con- 
tinued to  be  the  ministers  of  the  church.  Possibly  they 
were  regarded  as  the  "elders"  (vide  I.  Pet.  v.  1).  Peter, 
James,  and  John  were  the  leaders ;  when  persecution 
arose,  James  was  beheaded  and  Peter  was  imprisoned. 
When,  following  the  example  of  the  synagogue,  elders 
were  appointed,  it  would  be  by  the  same  method  as 
the  seven,  who  for  convenience'  sake  are  sometimes 
called  deacons  (xv.  6,  22).  Peter  continued  pro- 
minent, but  not  apparently  pre-eminent.  He  under- 
took missionary  work,  and  travelled,  not  only  through 
Palestine,    but    as    far  as    Babylon,    where    he   settled 


PRIMITIVE    COMMUNITIES     37 

(I.  Pet.  v.  13).  The  presidency  of  the  church  came 
to  James,  the  Lord's  brother  (xii.  17,  xv.  13,  xxi.  12; 
Gal.  i.  19,  ii.  9,  12),  probably  because  of  his  relation- 
ship with  Jesus.  We  know  from  Hegesippus  that 
he  was  a  man  of  Jewish  piety;  his  knees  were  worn 
like  those  of  a  camel  by  constant  prayer;  he  was 
stoned  to  death  in  an  illegal  way  by  the  Sanhedrim. 
The  letter  attributed  to  James  in  the  New  Testament 
represents  him  as  a  very  Jewish  Christian,  a  true  servant 
of  Christ,  and  yet  a  faithful  Jew.  The  place  of  James 
in  the  church  at  Jerusalem,  presiding  over  it,  when 
questions  are  referred  to  it,  and  giving  voice  to  its 
decisions,  is  the  first  hint  of  the  monarchical  episcopate 
in  the  church.  Indeed  we  may  say  that  in  a  shadowy 
way  the  three  orders  already  appear,  a  forecast  of  the 
future:  in  chap.  xxi.  18,  we  have  James  (the  bishop?) 
and  the  elders ;  and  we  may  assume  that  the  deacons 
appointed  in  chap.  vi.  5,  or  their  successors,  were  still 
there.  But  the  church  in  Jerusalem  had  but  a  brief 
existence,  and  though  we  cannot  say  with  Wernle 
("The  Beginnings  of  Christianity"),  that  it  had  made  a 
false  start,  we  have  to  look  in  another  direction  to 
find  the  beginnings  and  development  of  the  early  com- 
munities. 

This  fact  is  brought  out  clearly  by  the  Acts.  Perse- 
cution began,  the  Twelve  apparently  were  scattered 
with  the  rest  (viii.  4),  and  the  church  of  Jerusalem 
began  to  reproduce  itself  sporadically  elsewhere.  Pre- 
sently we  begin  to  hear,  not  of  the  church,  but  of 
churches;  e.g.  in  many  MSS.  ix.  31  reads,  "the  churches 
throughout  all  Judaea  and  Galilee  and  Samaria  " ;  this  is 


38  THE    EARLY    CHURCH 

the  first  instance  of  the  plural.  But  it  soon  becomes 
common  enough.  A  church  has  sprung  up  at  Antioch 
(xiii.  i),  others  in  Syria  and  Cilicia  (xv.  41).  And  soon 
the  great  missionary  Apostle,  Paul,  was  planting  churches 
all  over  the  Roman  Empire. 

It  is  the  emergence  of  this  great  name  which  gives 
to  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  its  main  importance.  The 
chief  of  the  Apostles  is  not  one  of  the  Twelve  at  all. 
The  hand  which  was  to  shape  the  church  was  that 
which  made  churches.  He  was  a  chosen  vessel  to 
carry  the  church  beyond  the  borders  of  Judaism,  and 
to  secure  the  church  from  hierarchical  domination  by 
edifying  the  churches. 

§  4.  Before  tracing  the  characteristics  of  Paul's 
churches,  a  moment's  attention  must  be  given  to  the 
relation  between  the  church  and  the  churches,  which 
emerges  in  the  story  without  comment  or  explanation. 
When  once  the  word  is  used  in  the  plural,  it  gives  the 
impression  that  each  church  is  an  independent  society 
unrelated  to  the  rest.  But  if  we  have  correctly  traced 
the  origin  of  the  idea,  we  shall  be  right  in  resisting  this 
impression  as  erroneous.  The  church  comes  into  being 
as  one.  "The  whole  church"  (Acts  v.  11),  means  the 
church  at  Jerusalem  only,  because  at  present  there  was 
but  one  congregation,  but  the  term  would  still  apply 
when,  owing  to  wide  extension,  the  congregations  would 
be  scattered  throughout  the  world.  When  that  en- 
largement has  taken  place,  and  we  read  of  the  church 
in  Antioch  or  in  Corinth  or  in  Rome,  we  are  not  to 
suppose  that  these  are  separate  and  unrelated  units. 
Rather    the    implication    is,   that   the    church,   viz.   the 


PRIMITIVE    COMMUNITIES     39 

society  of  the  faithful  united  in  Christ,  the  one  great 
fellowship,  manifests  itself  necessarily  in  various  locali- 
ties and  companies ;  the  companies  are  distinct,  but 
the  church  is  one.  It  is  only  by  constantly  bearing 
this  in  mind  that  we  can  understand  the  sudden  transi- 
tions in  the  Pauline  letters  from  the  churches  to  the 
church. 

It  is  fortunate  that  the  first  mention  of  the  church  in 
the  New  Testament  (Matt.  xvi.  17)  forces  us  to  grasp 
the  idea  of  unity  from  the  beginning,  though  the  rest 
of  the  New  Testament  is  occupied  mainly  with  the 
foundation,  the  life,  and  the  practices  of  the  local 
societies,  which,  like  the  cells  of  the  body,  in  their 
totality  constitute  the  church.  In  the  Pauline  churches, 
as  they  are  revealed  in  the  earlier  letters  of  Paul,  there 
are  some  distinctive  features,  which  our  information 
does  not  enable  us  to  trace  in  the  original  church  at 
Jerusalem.  From  our  sources,  chiefly  the  letters  of 
Paul  himself,  we  form  a  clear  idea  of  the  ministry,  the 
worship,  including  the  sacraments,  and  the  discipline. 
Some  of  the  practices  and  rules  of  the  early  Pauline 
churches,  e.g.  the  speaking  with  tongues,  or  the  silence 
of  women,  were  only  of  transient  duration,  and  a  diffi- 
cult problem  arises,  the  problem  of  determining  what 
was  permanent  and  essential,  germinal  for  the  future, 
and  what  was  only  tentative  and  unimportant.  But 
there  can  be  no  hesitation  in  recognising  the  broad 
facts  of  the  situation,  the  features  which  make  the 
Pauline  church  a  norm  or  standard  for  all  ages.  The 
presence  of  Christ,  through  the  Spirit,  and  the  freedom 
of  the  Spirit's  action  and  utterance  in  the  community, 


4o  THE    EARLY    CHURCH 

make  the  church.     These  are  the  primary  and  essential 
conditions. 

First,  as  to  the  ministry.  Paul  followed  the  example 
of  the  church  at  Jerusalem,  itself  taken  from  the 
synagogue,  of  putting  the  management  of  each  newly 
formed  community  into  the  hands  of  elders.  This  pres- 
byterian  government  is  radical  and  essential.  After 
the  missionary  tour  in  Southern  Galatia  we  read  that 
Paul  and  Barnabas  "appointed  elders  in  every  church" 
(Acts  xiv.  23).  The  word  used  here  for  "appointing," 
indicates  stretching  out  the  hand;  it  is  the  same  verb 
as  in  II.  Cor.  viii.  19.1  Originally  it  meant  the  stretching 
out  of  the  hand  to  give  a  vote  in  the  Athenian  Assembly, 
or  "  ecclesia  "  ;  it  suggests,  therefore,  a  popular  election. 
But  the  original  meaning  was  no  doubt  forgotten  in 
usage.  The  word  came  to  mean  "  elect "  or  "  appoint " 
in  any  way.  And  when  Paul  and  Barnabas  appointed 
the  elders,  we  cannot  think  of  an  election  by  the 
assembly.  The  mode  of  appointment,  therefore,  re- 
mains uncertain,  though  it  is  clear  that  prayer  and 
fasting,  and  dependence  on  the  Spirit's  guidance  were 
the  essential  conditions  of  the  appointment.  The 
function  of  the  elders  in  the  Pauline  Church  is  sug- 
gested in  Acts  xx.  28.  "Take  heed  unto  yourselves 
and  to  all  the  flock  in  the  which  the  Holy  Ghost  hath 
made  you  overseers,  to  feed  the  church  of  God  which 
He  purchased  with  His  own  blood."  It  is  implied  that 
they  are  to  do  in  their  church  what  the  Apostles  did 

1  "  The  brother  who  was  appointed  by  the  churches  to  travel  with 
us  in  the  matter  of  this  grace." 


PRIMITIVE    COMMUNITIES      41 

in  the  church  at  Jerusalem.  Spiritual  guidance  and 
teaching,  the  careful  protection  of  the  people  from  false 
teachers  (ver.  29),  the  pastoral  office,  this  was  the 
function  of  the  elders.  The  number  of  elders  or 
bishops  (for  it  is  to  be  observed  that  the  word  "  over- 
seer "  here  is  that  which  became  the  ecclesiastical  term 
for  "bishop")  in  each  local  community  is  not  determined. 
In  I.  Pet.  v.  1-5,  it  is  implied  that  all  the  elder  men 
were  appointed  to  the  office,  while  all  the  younger  men 
occupied  the  subordinate  place  of  "  deacons."  A  church 
which  met  in  a  house,  as  many  of  the  Pauline  churches 
did  (Rom.  xvi.  5 ;  I.  Cor.  xvi.  12  ;  Col.  iv.  15  ;  Phil.  2), 
would  probably  not  have  in  it  more  than  four  or  five 
older  men ;  these  were  appointed  elders  officially. 

Clearly  in  these  first  days  every  member  of  the 
church  held  office.  For  now  we  come  to  observe  the 
variety  of — "  officers,"  shall  we  call  them  ?  But  they  are 
not  officers,  they  are  persons  endowed  with  spiritual 
gifts  corresponding  to  their  individual  faculties.  They 
are  severally  members  one  of  another. 

Some  prophesy — that  is,  utter  the  message  of  God 
under  the  influence  of  the  Spirit ;  others  minister,  as 
the  seven  did  at  Jerusalem ;  others  teach,  others  exhort, 
others  give  largely,  others  govern,  others  do  works  of 
mercy  (Rom.  xii.  5-8).  Here  are  seven  functions, 
represented  by  different  functionaries.  In  a  later 
Epistle  only  five  are  mentioned — apostles,  prophets, 
evangelists,  pastors,  and  teachers  (Eph.  iv.  11).  In 
I.  Cor.  xii.  28  the  list  includes  eight — apostles,  prophets, 
teachers,  miracles,  healings,  helps,  governments,  kinds 
of  tongues.       If  we   were   to   take    each   term   as   the 


42 


THE    EARLY    CHURCH 


specific  name  of  an  office,  we  should  from  these  three 
passages  infer  an  extraordinary  richness  of  ministry : 


Rom. 


I.  Cor. 


Eph. 


Prophets 
Deacons 

Apostles 
Prophets 

Apostles 
Prophets 

Teachers 

Teachers 

Teachers 

Exhorters 

Givers 

Rulers 

Governments 

Those  who  show 

Healings 

mercy 

Miracles 

Helps 

Kinds  of  tongues 

Evangelists 
Pastors 

Here  are  thirteen  offices,  not  to  mention  that  women 
could  be  deaconesses  (Rom.  xvi.  i).  But,  as  the 
prophets  and  teachers  are  the  only  two  which  occur 
in  all  the  lists,  we  may  assume  that  there  is  no  inten- 
tion of  describing  in  full  the  officials  of  a  church. 
Rather  the  idea  is  that  the  Spirit  at  work  in  the 
society  employs  all  in  some  way,  and  some  in  the 
specific  ways  of  teaching  and  governing,  which  finally 
crystallised  into  the  Christian  ministry.  At  the  same 
time  we  cannot  help  suspecting  that  the  early  Pauline 
Church  imitated  the  synagogue  in  this  respect,  that 
while  the  elders  were  the  authority  for  managing  the 
assemblies  and  for  maintaining  order,  the  reading  and 


PRIMITIVE    COMMUNITIES      43 

exhortation  were  not  confined  to  stated  ministers,  but 
were  left  to  any  members,  or  even  visitors,  to  whom 
the  Spirit  gave  the  command  to  speak.  Thus  the 
presence  of  "  Apostles "  in  the  churches  of  the  New 
Testament  is  exceptional.  Evidently  in  forming  the 
conception  of  the  ministry  for  all  time,  the  question 
must  be  faced — Who  were  intended  to  take  the  place  of 
the  Apostles  when  the  generation  of  those  who  had 
seen  the  Lord  should  have  passed  away?  Paul  the 
Apostle,  like  the  original  Twelve,  and  like  some  of 
his  colleagues  who  seem  to  have  borne  the  name,1 
formed  during  their  lifetime  the  link  between  the 
churches,  and  secured  the  unity  of  the  church  in 
their  person  and  in  their  assembly.  But  as  there 
could  be  no  second  generation  of  those  "  who  had 
seen  the  Lord,"  it  must  always  be  remembered,  in 
studying  the  New  Testament  Church,  that  a  gap  re- 
mains for  subsequent  ages  in  some  way  to  fill. 

The  variety  of  functions  in  a  Pauline  church,  which 
did  not  all  crystallise  into  specific  offices,  produced  a 
richness  of  worship,  an  exuberance  of  instruction, 
which  was  not  maintained  in  later  times.  Yet  while 
it  lasted,  it  suggested  certain  truths  which  the  church 
should  never  consent  to  lose.  A  church  is  an  organism 
of  the  Spirit ;  where  the  Spirit  of  the  Lord  is,  there 
is  liberty.  A  fixed  and  stereotyped  form,  restricting  the 
perfect  freedom  of  the  Spirit  of  God  to  employ  whom 
He  will  and  to  utter  His  thought  through  any  suitable 

1  e.g.  II.  Cor.  viii.  23.  Titus  and  others  are  called  airoaroKoL 
iKKkrjtjL&v.  In  I.  Thess.  ii.  6  Paul  implies  that  his  companions, 
Barnabas,  Silas,  Timothy,  were  also  Apostles. 


44  THE    EARLY    CHURCH 

mouth,  must  always  be  a  check  on  the  church's  life. 
Granted  that  certain  phenomena  in  the  Pauline 
churches  were  necessarily  transient,  does  not  the  prin- 
ciple of  the  freedom  of  the  Spirit  always  remain  ?  Must 
not  the  object  be  to  give  full  expression  to  the  mind 
of  the  Spirit  in  every  church  community,  come  the 
message  through  whom  He  will  ? 

The  assembly  in  a  Pauline  church  enjoyed  a  freedom 
which  passed  easily  into  licence.  We  cannot  in  the 
earlier  letters  detect  any  sign  of  a  form  or  order  of 
service.  There  is  no  liturgy,  no  stated  hymnology. 
Whether  the  Old  Testament  Scriptures  were  read  we 
do  not  know.  Whether  any  evangelic  narratives  were 
in  use — for  instance,  Peter's  teaching,  as  it  was  later 
embodied  in  Mark's  Gospel — we  are  not  sure ;  Paul's 
own  silence  about  the  incidents  of  the  Lord's  life 
would  indicate  that  such  records  were  not  employed 
in  the  church.  Letters  of  the  Apostle  himself,  as  they 
came  into  being,  were  read  in  the  church  to  which 
they  were  addressed,  and  in  neighbouring  communities 
(I.  Thess.  v.  27;  Col.  iv.  16).  But  we  cannot  tell 
whether  they  were  read!regularly,  or  as  part  of  the  worship. 
All  we  see  with  clearness  is  that  the  church  assembly 
was  a  scene  of  unrestricted  utterance  of  divine  truth 
through  the  various  members  who  were  present.  The 
prophets  were  the  most  important ;  these  were  men 
(or  women,  like  the  daughters  of  Philip — Acts  xxi.  9) 
who,  under  the  control  of  the  Spirit,  uttered  the  truth 
of  God,  sometimes,  no  doubt,  forecasting  events,  like 
Agabus  (ver.  n),  but  generally  guiding  the  community 
by  the   direct  word   of  God.     At   Corinth,   a   city   of 


PRIMITIVE    COMMUNITIES      45 

extraordinary  looseness  and  spiritual  instability,  this 
utterance  of  the  prophets  sometimes  took  a  singular 
form,  the  so-called  glossolalia ;  the  speaker,  in  a  kind 
of  ecstasy  or  trance,  used  a  language  which  was  unintelli- 
gible to  the  hearers,  unless  another  prophet  was 
present  who  was  able  to  interpret  it.  Perhaps  it  was 
a  foreign  language ;  perhaps  it  was  the  inarticulate 
murmur  or  chanting  of  one  who  spoke  under  strong 
excitement.  Paul  seems  to  have  been  distressed  by 
this  curious  psychical  phenomenon.  He  did  what 
he  could  to  repress  it,  though  it  was  a  "gift"  which 
he  himself  possessed  (I.  Cor.  xiv.  18).  Impressive  as 
it  was  at  first,  as  the  sign  of  an  unknown  spiritual 
power  at  work,  it  was  not  edifying  in  the  long  run. 
It  did  not  appeal  to  the  understanding.  It  was  only 
emotional.  No  doubt,  owing  to  Paul's  discouragement 
of  the  phase,  it  proved  to  be  only  transitory;  though 
it  has  appeared  again  from  time  to  time  in  the  history 
of  the  church ;  for  example,  in  the  early  days  of  the 
Irvingite  Church. 

As  a  rule,  the  utterance  of  the  prophets  was  not 
only  intelligible,  but  overwhelmingly  convincing.  An 
unbeliever  coming  into  the  meeting  would  be  con- 
strained to  bow  down  and  recognise  the  presence  of 
God  in  the  manifestation  (I.  Cor.  xiv.  24-25). 

The  Teachers,  though  speaking  under  the  same 
spiritual  influence,  had  less  of  the  rhapsodical  element 
in  them.  They  taught  the  truths  of  the  Old  Testament 
and  the  fulfilments  of  the  Old  in  the  new  order  which 
was  now  instituted.  The  beginnings  of  dogma  and 
creed  would  be  shaped  by  the  teachers,  and  handed 


46  THE    EARLY    CHURCH 

down  in  a  tradition.  The  exhorters,  speaking  by  the 
spirit,  would  present  the  practical  side  of  the  Gospel, 
the  appeal  to  holy  living  or  to  religious  service,  the 
comfort  to  mourners,  the  encouragement  to  weak  and 
erring  brethren.  Thus  it  would  seem  that  various 
members  contributed  to  the  service  as  they  were  able 
(I.  Cor.  xiv.  26).  Perhaps  one,  with  the  poetic  or 
musical  gift,  would  bring  a  psalm  for  the  congregation 
to  sing ;  another  would  mention  a  revelation  of  truth 
which  had  come  to  him.  The  service  would  go  on, 
one  speaking,  the  others  saying  Amen  in  assent,  often, 
no  doubt,  for  an  indefinite  time. 

In  the  worship  of  the  Pauline  Church  the  memorial 
meal  of  the  Lord's  Last  Supper  had  a  constant  place. 
From  I.  Cor.  xi.  17-34  we  can  form  a  clear  idea  of 
this  institution  in  the  earliest  days.  We  cannot,  un- 
fortunately, tell  whether  the  practice  in  Jerusalem  and 
the  Jewish  churches  was  the  same,  for  Acts  ii.  42-46 
is  our  only  gleam  of  light  upon  the  subject.  But  in 
the  Pauline  Church  the  common  meal  was  taken  to 
symbolise  the  unity  of  the  fellowship  as  the  body  of 
Christ  (I.  Cor.  xii.  12).  It  would  be  of  the  greatest 
value  to  know  whether  this  interpretation  was  peculiar 
to  Paul,  or  derived  in  some  sense  from  the  twelve 
Apostles.  But  our  only  interpretation  of  the  Supper 
is  this  in  I.  Cor.  xi.,  and  we  have  no  means  of 
comparing  it  with  the  view  and  the  practice  of  those 
who  were  present  at  the  Last  Supper  and  heard  the 
command  of  the  Lord.  The  puzzling  problem  is,  that 
when  the  eucharist  appears  in  the  early  church  writers 
it  shows  little  or  no  connection  with  the  language  and 


PRIMITIVE    COMMUNITIES      47 

ideas  of  Paul ;  and  its  subsequent  development  as 
a  sacrifice,  rather  than  a  meal,  dependent  on  the 
presence  and  word  of  a  priest,  is  so  far  removed  from 
the  passage  before  us,  that  it  seems  hardly  credible 
that  the  later  should  have  been  evolved  from  this 
earlier  Pauline  practice. 

To  discuss  the  question  how  the  Mass  grew  out  of 
the  Lord's  Supper  would  take  us  too  far  away  from 
our  subject,  which  is  the  Early  Church.  All  we  can 
do  here  is  faithfully  to  study  the  institution  as  it 
appears  in  the  New  Testament. 

It  is  to  be  noted  at  once  that  Paul  claims  to  have 
received  the  idea  and  the  form  of  the  Supper  from 
the  Lord  himself.  Here,  as  in  Galatians,  he  delights 
to  claim  a  complete  independence  from  those  who 
were  Apostles  before  him.  In  accordance  with  his 
usual  tone  of  thought  and  language,  we  interpret  his 
claim  to  be  this :  that  the  Lord,  who  appeared  to 
him  at  his  conversion,  by  virtue  of  which  appearance 
he  became  an  apostle,  directly  communicated  to  him 
the  facts  and  the  significance  of  the  Supper.  All 
along  Paul  is  directly  taught ;  his  teaching  is  by  reve- 
lation. If  the  claim  to  be  inspired  and  authoritative 
is  established  at  all — and,  apart  from  that,  most  of 
our  Christian  belief  would  be  discredited — it  covers 
this  account  of  the  Supper.  In  just  the  same  sense 
as  we  accept  Paul's  interpretation  of  the  death  and 
sacrifice  of  Christ,  the  sacrifice  offered  once  for  all, 
we  must  accept  his  interpretation  of  the  institution 
of  the  eucharist.  It  is  not  only  the  sole  apostolic 
account   that  we   possess  of  its   origin    and    intention, 


48  THE    EARLY    CHURCH 

but  it  is  an  account  which  professes,  through  Paul, 
to  come  from  the  Lord  Himself,  necessarily  after  His 
resurrection  and  ascension.  In  contrast  with  the 
interpretation  which  gradually  crept  into  the  church, 
and  culminated  in  the  doctrine  of  Transubstantia- 
tion  and  the  sacrifice  of  the  Mass,  this  is  the  view 
of  the  Supper  given  to  Paul  by  Jesus  Himself.  It 
was  a  genuine  meal,  observed  at  the  meeting  of  the 
church ;  the  several  members  brought  the  food,  and, 
according  to  Paul's  view,  were  bound  to  make  a 
common  stock  and  share  each  other's  contributions. 
The  abuse,  which  occasions  this  correction  and  the 
narrative  of  the  Lord's  institution,  consisted  in  each 
retaining  his  own  supply,  so  that  the  well-to-do 
people  with  their  daintier  food  threw  into  painful 
contrast  the  poor  with  their  crusts.  This  was  the 
occasion  of  separation,  jealousy,  and  heart-burning. 
It  was  to  eat,  "not  discerning  the  Lord's  body." 
For  the  object  of  the  meal  was  not  to  satisfy  hunger; 
that  could  be  done  at  home  (ver.  34);  but  to  de- 
monstrate by  the  symbolic  eating  and  drinking  the 
absolute  unity  of  those  who  as  believers  in  Christ 
were  members  of  His  body. 

Paul  therefore  understood  the  words,  "this  is  My 
body,"  to  mean,  not  that  the  bread  was  transformed 
into  the  flesh  of  Jesus,  but  that  the  bread  repre- 
sented the  community  of  the  brotherhood ;  they  ate 
and  drank  together  as  an  indication  of  their  corporate 
union  through  faith  in  their  Lord.  The  covenant  in 
the  blood  is  that  pledge  of  fellowship  in  Christ  by 
which,  spiritually,  they  are  made  of  one  blood.     Thus 


PRIMITIVE    COMMUNITIES      49 

the  eucharist  is  to  Paul  the  symbol  and  bond  of  charity, 
that  new  law  of  love  which,  according  to  the  Fourth 
Gospel,  was  the  theme  of  our  Lord's  discourse  at  the 
table  where  He  instituted  the  rite. 

When  the  reader,  dismissing  the  later  developments 
which  easily  colour  our  story  of  an  ancient  document, 
takes  the  whole  passage,  I.  Cor.  xi.  17-xiv.  1,  in  its  due 
connection,  he  can  hardly  miss  the  meaning.  The 
chief  revelation  of  Christ  is  the  fellowship  one  with 
another,  which  results  from  being  united  with  the  Head 
Christ  Jesus,  that  fellowship  which  in  I.  John  i.  7  is 
presented  as  the  condition  of  "  the  blood  of  Jesus  His 
Son  cleansing  us  from  all  sin."  The  deep  agreement 
of  Paul  with  John,  Paul  who  records  the  institution  of 
the  Supper  the  most  fully,  and  John  who  deliberately 
omits  it,  is  a  strong  confirmation  of  the  doctrine  as  the 
original  intention  of  Jesus. 

The  church  was  to  be  a  fellowship  in  which  the 
divisions  of  rank  and  wealth  were  to  be  ignored.  In 
the  synagogue  men  were  ranged  on  a  principle  of  social 
distinction ;  the  chief  men  occupied  the  chief  seats.  In 
the  new  synagogue,  the  church,  this  distinction  was  to 
be  obliterated  (Jas.  ii.  1-5).  There,  all  were  equal 
before  God  ;  not  only  equal,  but  one,  in  the  solidarity  of 
the  spiritual  body.  The  Lord's  Supper,  the  one  formal 
institution  of  the  church  which  rested  on  a  definite 
act  of  His  own,  was  taken  as  the  evidence  and  con- 
firmation of  this  new  and  startling  idea.  It  was  to 
secure  the  fusion  of  members  in  the  mystic  brother- 
hood. All  were  to  eat  and  drink  as  representing  their 
unity  in  the  person  of  Jesus.     To  forget  that,  to  eat 

D 


5o  THE    EARLY    CHURCH 

and  drink  with  divisive,  arrogant,  self-seeking  thought, 
was  to  eat  and  drink  unworthily,  to  be  guilty  of  the 
body  and  blood  of  the  Lord.  This  violation  of  the 
fundamental  law  of  the  church  incurred  judgment  and 
penalty.  At  Corinth  disease  and  death  had  entered 
into  the  community,  and  Paul  does  not  hesitate  to 
affirm  that  this  is  the  judgment  for  the  selfish  violation 
of  the  Lord's  Supper. 

There  is  one  other  feature  of  the  Pauline  Church 
which  deserves  close  attention,  viz.  the  discipline. 
Here  we  come  into  closer  contact  with  the  community 
at  Jerusalem ;  and  the  reminiscence  of  the  synagogue 
is  obvious.  To  be  cast  out  of  the  synagogue  was 
a  dire  punishment  for  a  Jew,  a  punishment  which  was 
felt  more  by  men  of  high  position  than  by  the  humble. 
In  the  first  episode  recorded  when  the  church  was 
formed  at  Jerusalem,  we  are  told  of  the  fear  that  fell 
upon  the  people.  The  apostolic  company  was  filled 
with  the  Holy  Ghost,  so  that  a  searching  discipline 
was  exercised  by  the  society.  When  two  members  of 
the  community  acted  deceitfully  in  the  assembly,  the  lie, 
as  against  the  Holy  Ghost,  entailed  immediate  death 
(Acts  v.  i-ii).  In  the  Pauline  Church  the  discipline 
proceeded  in  a  more  human  and  methodical  way,  but  it 
was  on  the  same  principle.  The  object  of  the  discipline 
was  not  to  secure  obedience  to  a  church  authority,  or 
orthodoxy  of  belief — such  a  thought  lay  at  present  in 
the  far  future — but  to  establish  the  higher  standard  of 
morals  which  Christ  had  introduced.  To  be  truthful,  to 
be  pure,  was  not  even  the  ideal  of  antiquity.  The 
church  had  to  create  the  ideal,  and  to  enforce  it.     At 


PRIMITIVE    COMMUNITIES      51 

Jerusalem  the  discipline  first  enforced  truth.  At  Corinth 
its  first  task  was  to  secure  purity. 

The  passage  I.  Cor.  v.  is  the  locus  dassicus.  The 
community  was  to  keep  itself  pure.  A  member  who 
was  a  fornicator,  covetous,  an  idolater,  a  reviler,  a 
drunkard,  or  an  extortioner,  was  to  be  cut  off  from  the 
community.  The  essential  idea  of  the  church  was  a 
holy  brotherhood ;  the  Communion  or  common  meal 
was  the  expression  of  a  new  society  living,  as  compared 
with  that  old  pagan  world,  on  higher  ground,  guided 
by  nobler  principles.  We  have  nothing  to  do  in 
these  early  days  with  the  infliction  of  temporal  punish- 
ments, or  with  that  appalling  engine  of  mediaeval  despot- 
ism, the  handing  over  of  the  delinquent  to  the  secular 
arm ;  but  the  society,  based  on  the  person  and  teaching 
of  Christ,  is  bound  to  eject  from  its  borders  those  who 
refuse  obedience  to  Him. 

It  is  difficult  to  induce  the  church  to  act.  Rather  it 
seems  to  pride  itself  on  its  charity  in  passing  over  the 
violations  of  moral  purity  (I.  Cor.  v.  2).  But  the  Pauline 
directions  are  explicit.  The  church  must  meet  in  the 
name  of  the  Lord  Jesus,  and  with  His  power  must 
deliver  such  a  one  unto  Satan  for  the  destruction  of  the 
flesh.  The  delinquent  must  be  expelled  from  the  sacred 
society,  which  means  that  he  falls  back  into  the  world 
of  sin  and  Satan  from  which  he  had  escaped.  This 
severity  is  primarily  for  the  salvation  of  the  church, 
which  would  rapidly  lose  its  meaning  and  power  if  it 
became  mixed  like  the  world  around  it;  but  it  is  also 
for  the  saving  of  the  delinquent,  "  that  the  spirit  may  be 
saved  in  the  day  of  the  Lord  Jesus "  (ver.   5).     Paul 


52  THE    EARLY    CHURCH 

is  very  anxious  that,  when  the  excommunication  has 
brought  the  needed  contrition,  the  penitent  should  be 
received  back  into  the  fold  (II.  Cor.  ii.  5-8).  This 
passage  is  of  peculiar  interest,  because  it  shows  how  the 
first  believers  understood  the  solemn  power  to  bind  and 
loose,  to  remit  and  to  retain  sin,  which  had  been  com- 
mitted to  them  (Matt.  xvi.  19,  xviii.  18;  John  xx.  23). 
When  in  later  days  the  commission  of  our  Lord  is  cited 
as  an  authority  for  a  priest  to  grant  absolution  to  a 
penitent,  it  is  well  to  realise  how  the  command  was 
understood  in  the  church,  before  a  priest  was  thought  of, 
and  when  confession  was  still  only  a  confession  one  to 
another,  followed  by  a  prayer  one  for  another  (Jas.  v.  16). 

The  act  of  discipline,  though  enjoined  by  Paul,  and 
carried  out,  as  he  says,  "with  his  spirit,"  was  not  the 
work  of  the  officers  of  the  church ;  we  have  no  mention 
of  elders  or  other  functionaries ;  it  is  the  work  of  the 
society  itself,  assembled  according  to  the  idea  of  Jesus, 
in  His  name,  and  therefore  with  His  authority. 

The  primitive  communities  therefore,  as  we  see  them 
in  the  Acts  and  the  earlier  letters  of  the  Apostles,  are 
societies  of  believers  in  Christ,  organised  in  the  simplest 
way  under  the  guidance  of  elders,  ministered  to  by 
their  own  members,  as  each  was  directed  by  the  Spirit, 
exercising  a  powerful  moral  influence  and  discipline 
upon  all  who  joined  them,  preserving  the  fellowship  in 
love,  by  the  institution  of  the  Supper  and  by  all  that  it 
implied.  Nothing  has  been  said  yet  about  baptism. 
It  appears  as  the  rite  appointed  by  the  Lord,  to  indi- 
cate admission  into  the  society.  In  the  Acts,  as  men 
and  women  believe  in  Christ  they  are  baptized,   with 


PRIMITIVE    COMMUNITIES 


53 


their  households.  In  Paul's  letters  the  baptism  is  treated 
mystically ;  believers  are  buried  with  Christ  in  baptism. 
It  is  implied  that  they  were  submerged  in  the  laver, 
and  issued  from  it  to  newness  of  life.  Thus  Paul  calls 
the  font  "  the  laver  of  regeneration."  Baptism,  not  the 
washing  of  water,  but  the  interrogation  of  the  conscience, 
i.e.  the  intelligent  response  of  the  soul  to  Christ,  saves 
(I.  Pet.  iii.  21).  The  saved  are  baptized;  they  are  not 
saved  by  being  baptized,  but  they  are  baptized  because 
by  faith  in  Christ  they  are  saved. 

The  question  whether  the  familes  should  be  baptized 
too,  in  anticipation  of  the  teaching  and  training  which 
should  be  given,  is  not  directly  raised.  But  the 
principle  on  which  baptism  was  afterwards  given  to 
infants  is  implied  in  Paul's  contention  that  the  chil- 
dren of  a  Christian  are  holy  (I.  Cor.  vii.  14).  The 
notices  are  meagre  in  the  New  Testament,  because 
baptism  does  not  there  hold  the  prominent  place  which 
it  has  taken  in  church  history  and  dogma.  In  the 
apostolic  times  the  all-important  question  was  that  of 
"  being  born  again  of  water  and  the  spirit."  The 
spiritual  birth  was  vital  and  essential,  but  it  was  not 
for  a  moment  supposed  that  the  rite  of  baptism  pro- 
duced it. 

Finally,  the  picture  of  the  primitive  communities 
must  be  deeply  shaded.  All  our  information  about 
them  is  accompanied  with,  and  even  arises  out  of,  the 
most  painful  facts  of  hypocrisy,  selfishness,  divisions, 
and  other  moral  corruptions.  In  Jewish  circles,  where 
the  discipline  of  Moses  had  prevailed  for  many  centuries, 
the  faults  were  rather  exclusiveness,  sectarianism,  cen- 


54  THE    EARLY    CHURCH 

soriousness,  than  what  are  called  now  immoralities; 
but  in  the  churches  gathered  out  of  the  surrounding 
heathenism,  composed  evidently  to  a  large  extent  of 
the  servile  and  degraded  classes,  there  was  a  long 
struggle  for  even  the  elementary  moral  principles. 
Christians  had  to  learn  not  to  steal,  not  to  lie,  not 
to  indulge  in  the  prevailing  sensuality. 

The  letters  to  the  seven  churches  in  the  Revelation 
afford  a  melancholy  glimpse  into  the  communities 
in  the  neighbourhood  where  Paul  had  worked  and 
John  had  lived.  The  decay  and  disappearance  of 
those  churches  suggest  that  some  stronger  principles 
of  organisation,  of  spiritual  life,  and  moral  education 
would  have  to  appear  if  the  primitive  communities 
were  ever  to  cover  the  earth  and  gather  into  the 
church  all  mankind. 

After  all,  the  church  of  the  New  Testament  is  only 
the  germ  of  the  church  which  our  Lord  founded. 
But  it  may  be  confidently  affirmed  that  the  essential 
principles  in  the  germ,  the  presence  of  the  Spirit,  the 
vitality,  the  brotherhood,  the  ethical  standard,  must  be 
essential  to  the  end. 


CHAPTER    III 

DEVELOPMENT  IN  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT 

§  i.  The  New  Testament  writings  cover  a  period  of 
half  a  century.  It  is  difficult  to  arrange  them  in  exact 
chronological  order ;  but  it  is  easy  to  trace  a  develop- 
ment of  teaching  and  of  practice  between  the  earliest 
Pauline  and  the  latest  Johannine  books. 

We  tried  in  the  last  chapter,  as  far  as  it  was  possible 
to  pierce  through  the  chronological  confusion,  to  see 
the  church  at  its  very  commencement.  In  the  present 
chapter  we  must  see  its  development  within  the  New 
Testament  limits.  In  the  following  chapter,  in  order 
to  correct  or  confirm  our  idea  of  development,  we 
shall  examine  the  literature  which  is  called  sub- 
apostolic — that  is,  the  earliest  books  which  have  come 
down  to  us  after  those  which  are  included  in  the 
Canon.  By  such  a  study,  carefully  pursued,  we  ought 
to  become  aware  that  the  church  necessarily  developed 
as  its  mission  expanded ;  we  ought  to  discover  the 
lines  of  its  development;  but,  above  all,  we  ought  to 
learn  how  far  the  development  was  a  decline  from 
the  primitive  ideas,  and  in  what  way  the  apostolic 
church   at  its   commencement   stands  as  the  norm  by 


56  THE    EARLY    CHURCH 

which  later  developments  must  be  criticised  and  cor- 
rected. 

Our  task,  then,  for  the  present  is,  bearing  in  mind 
what  the  church  was  in  the  first  flush  of  its  new  created 
life,  to  trace  its  development  during  the  subsequent 
half-century  or  so,  which  is  covered  by  the  New  Testa- 
ment .writings.  This  task  is  made  comparatively  simple 
by  a  book,  a  treasure  bequeathed  to  us  by  one  of 
the  greatest,  if  not  the  greatest  New  Testament  scholar 
whom  England  produced  in  the  last  century,  F.  J.  A. 
Hort.  Almost  the  last  service  which  that  remarkable 
man  rendered  to  Cambridge,  and  to  the  Christian 
community,  was  to  deliver  a  course  of  lectures  on 
the  Christian  Ecclesia,  in  which  he  traced  the  primi- 
tive conceptions  and  early  history  of  the  church.  It 
is  a  piece  of  work  done  once  for  all.  Hort  was  able 
to  see  a  subject  in  what  Bacon  called  "  dry  light " ; 
his  prejudices  or  preconceptions  could  be  laid  aside, 
and  with  an  almost  complete  detachment  of  mind  he 
could  examine  and  interpret  the  facts  of  the  past. 
Dismissing  the  crowd  of  assumptions  which  are  sug- 
gested by  the  growth  of  the  church  in  these  nine- 
teen centuries,  he  endeavoured  to  see  the  church  as 
it  was  in  New  Testament  times,  to  depolarise  words, 
and  to  apprehend  the  fundamental  ideas  of  institutions. 

How  necessary  it  is  to  do  this,  the  vagaries  of 
ecclesiastical  tradition  show.  The  Roman  Church 
raises  perilous  edifices  on  partial  truths,  and  from  them 
constructs  foundations,  which  are  in  the  air,  for  further 
building  :  little  by  little  these  fanciful  structures  lead 
the  mind  far  away  from  the  original  truths,  and  some- 


DEVELOPMENT  57 

times  the  original  truths  are  discredited  and  denied. 
For  example,  first  she  argues,  because  Jesus  is  divine, 
Mary  is  the  mother  of  God.  Then  she  argues  that, 
as  His  mother,  Jesus  must  yield  her  deference  ;  accord- 
ingly the  assumption  and  coronation  of  the  mother 
as  queen  of  heaven  became  a  dogma.  But  then  she 
argues  that  as  Joseph  was  Mary's  husband,  she  would 
yield  him  obedience  as  a  dutiful  wife ;  Joseph  must 
therefore  be  manipulated,  and  a  legend  of  his  transit 
to  heaven  is  invented,  and  represented  in  a  transept 
of  the  great  new  church  at  New  Pompeii.  First  the 
devout  are  taught  to  appeal  to  Mary,  because  of  her 
influence  over  her  Son ;  then  they  must  appeal  to 
Joseph  because  of  his  authority  over  her.  And  so 
the  perilous  structure  is  reared,  storey  overhanging 
storey,  until  it  topples  to  the  ground. 

The  growth  of  ecclesiastical  authority  is  all  of  this 
kind.  A  slight  extravagance  is  admitted  in  the  tradi- 
tion ;  swiftly  that  is  exaggerated,  and  weighty  inferences 
are  drawn  from  it;  the  figments,  working  in  thin  air, 
uncorrected  by  fact  or  reason,  are  rapidly  spun  out. 
first,  Christ's  words  to  Peter  are  misunderstood ;  Peter 
is  represented  as  the  rock  on  which  the  church  is 
built.  Then  the  figment  is  invented  that  what  was 
said  to  him  was  also  said  to  his  lineal  descendants. 
Then  the  legend  is  created  that  his  lineal  descendants 
are  the  bishops  of  Rome.  Then  not  only  does  each 
bishop  of  Rome  claim  the  supposed  commission  and 
authority  given  to  Peter,  but  the  commission  is  fanci- 
fully enlarged.  The  binding  and  loosing  is  interpreted 
as  infallibility,   an   infallibility  which  was  not   claimed 


58  THE    EARLY    CHURCH 

by  Peter  or  for  him ;  the  two  swords  which  Peter 
childishly  produced  to  defend  his  Lord  are  treated 
as  the  spiritual  and  the  temporal  authority  committed 
to  the  bishop  of  Rome.  And  thus  the  amazing  claim 
appears  in  Innocent  III.  or  Boniface  VIII.  that  Christ 
intended  the  Pope  to  exercise  an  absolute  authority 
over  the  church  and  over  temporal  states.  When  the 
structure  of  figments  subsides  and  perishes  under  the 
contempt  and  irritation  of  mankind,  Christianity  suffers, 
because  it  has  been  identified  with  this  fictitious  eccle- 
siastical development. 

One  of  the  greatest  gifts,  therefore,  is  that  which 
was  possessed  by  Hort,  and  by  that  equally  impartial 
Oxford  scholar,  Hatch — the  gift  of  seeing  through 
these  logical,  but  illegitimate,  assertions,  and  under- 
standing the  facts  of  the  church  at  the  beginning. 
It  may  be  said,  however,  why  cannot  we  read  the 
New  Testament  for  ourselves,  and  learn  what  the 
church  was,  by  a  careful  study  of  the  documents  which 
are  in  everybody's  hands?  The  answer  is,  that  as  it 
is  rare  to  find  a  scholar  who  can  claim  a  complete 
detachment  of  mind,  so  the  ordinary  reader  seldom 
approaches  the  New  Testament  with  freshness  of  view 
and  independence  of  judgment.  When  he  reads  the 
word  "  church,"  he  immediately  supposes  that  it  means 
exactly  what  it  means  to  the  modern  mind.  If  he 
is  quite  ignorant,  he  thinks  of  a  building  like  his  parish 
church  in  England.  But  if  he  is  far  from  ignorant, 
and  even  well  instructed,  he  imagines  that  "church" 
in  the  New  Testament  means  an  institution  like  the 
Church    of   England    or    the    Church    of   Rome :    he 


DEVELOPMENT  59 

assumes  that  the  church  then  was  constituted  like  the 
church  with  which  he  is  familiar;  he  accepts  without 
question  the  inference  that  because  there  are  bishops, 
priests,  and  deacons  now,  as  the  essential  constitution  of 
the  church,  so  there  were  then.  Or  if  he  is  a  Romanist 
he  is  convinced  that  in  New  Testament  times  there 
was  a  Pope,  and  that  the  words  of  our  Lord  to  Peter 
prove  it. 

Only  by  a  study  as  close  and  exhaustive  as  Hort's 
is  the  English  reader  able  to  learn  from  the  New 
Testament  what  the  church  of  the  apostles  was.  But 
when  Hort  has  made  the  study,  every  reader  of  the 
book  can  easily  verify  the  conclusions.  The  work  is 
done  once  for  all. 

And  let  it  be  observed,  this  line  of  study  is  one  of 
the  most  interesting  in  which  we  can  engage.  To 
get  back  into  a  distant  past,  to  read  ancient  docu- 
ments with  purged  eyes,  and  to  allow  words,  the 
meaning  of  which  has  been  worn  down  in  usage,  to 
recover  the  outline  and  gleam  of  the  day  when  they 
issued  from  the  mint  of  apostles  and  founders,  is  no  less 
fascinating  than  to  study  works  of  the  creative  imagi- 
nation. The  practical  and  spiritual  effect  is  equally 
important.  To  read  the  New  Testament  with  a  vivid 
understanding  is  to  enter  into  that  society  which  re- 
ceived the  first  impress  of  the  Gospel,  in  which  the 
recent  life  and  death  of  our  Lord  were  realised  as  a 
great,  the  greatest,  event — an  event  revolutionary  and 
regenerating.  It  is  said  that  in  order  to  recover  the 
power  and  effect  of  a  great  truth  it  is  only  necessary 
to  translate  it   again    into  action ;    in    the    same    way, 


60  THE    EARLY    CHURCH 

to  recover  the  meaning  and  the  dynamic  of  Christianity, 
it  is  only  necessary  to  go  back  into  the  circle  of  the 
first  believers,  and  begin  to  live  as  they  did.  The 
New  Testament,  as  the  collection  of  writings  that  has 
come  down  to  us  from  that  circle,  breathing  the  Spirit 
that  animates  those  apostles,  prophets,  and  evangelists, 
stamped  with  the  image  of  the  imminent  Lord,  is  a 
book  which  stands  for  ever  apart.  When  we  turn  to 
the  sub-apostolic  literature,  valuable  as  it  is  for  his- 
torical testimony,  we  are  conscious  of  a  lamentable 
change  of  spiritual  tone  and  decline  of  intellectual 
power.  The  epigoni  are  seldom  equal  to  the  founders  ; 
but  in  this  case  they  are  a  whole  heaven  apart.  The 
New  Testament  writings,  notwithstanding  some  obscu- 
rities and  many  unsolved  problems  connected  with 
them,  shine  by  their  own  light ;  God  is  manifestly  in 
them  ;  their  authority  is  not  extrinsic  but  intrinsic. 
The  illusion,  as  old  as  St.  Augustine,  that  we  accept 
their  authority  only  because  the  church  guarantees  it, 
is  always  dissipated  by  independent  study  of  them. 
Rather  we  go,  and  must  always  go,  to  them  to  test 
the  authority  of  the  church.  By  their  clear  and  start- 
ling evidence  we  learn  how  far  the  church  has  deviated 
from  the  practice,  the  fundamental  principles,  the  ideals, 
of  the  founders.  The  renewed  study  of  the  New 
Testament  is,  therefore,  always  the  beginning  of  another 
reformation ;  if  Erasmus  edits  a  Greek  Testament  there 
will  be  a  Luther  shaking  the  world. 

Let  us,  therefore,  try  to  see  the  New  Testament 
church  as  it  was. 

§  2.  When  the  New  Testament  books  are  arranged  in  a 


DEVELOPMENT  61 

right  chronological  order,  as,  for  instance,  in  Dr.  Moffat's 
"  Historical  New  Testament,"  the  growth  of  the  church 
can  be  traced  in  two  ways.  First,  we  can  see  how  the 
local  society  entered  on  a  course  of  development  which 
was  continued  in  after  days.  The  trend  of  this  de- 
velopment can  be  determined,  and  to  some  extent  the 
later  growths  which  are  illegitimate  can  be  criticised 
and  rejected  as  excrescences.  That  is  a  difficult 
task,  involving  us  in  controversy,  but  if  the  genius,  the 
essence,  of  the  New  Testament  communities  is  firmly 
grasped,  the  student  ought  to  acquire  a  discrimination 
in  the  matter  which  will  not  fail  him  in  face  of  the 
formidable  and  imposing  accretions  of  later  times. 
Secondly,  the  conception  of  the  church  as  a  whole 
becomes  clearer  and  stronger.  It  lies  side  by  side  with 
the  local  communities,  and  its  relation  to  them  never 
becomes  explicit,  so  that  a  difficulty  is  left  inherent  in 
the  New  Testament  itself,  with  which  ecclesiastical  theory 
has  had  to  cope.  It  is  not  beyond  question  whether 
the  idea  of  the  church  as  a  whole  comes  first  or  is 
developed  out  of  the  combination  of  the  local  societies. 
But  when  the  general  effect  of  the  New  Testament  is 
appraised,  when  the  canon  is,  so  to  speak,  closed,  the 
idea  of  the  church  which  remains  in  the  mind  is  not  so 
much  the  local  society,  which  has  been  the  predominant 
conception  in  the  course  of  the  Acts  and  the  Epistles, 
as  the  church  of  the  first-born,  the  general  assembly, 
typified  by  Mount  Zion,  the  city  descending  out  of 
heaven,  the  spiritualised  qahal. 

First,  then,   the   local   community  as  it  appears,   for 
instance,  in   the  Pastoral    Epistles,    is    more   definitely 


62  THE    EARLY    CHURCH 

organised.  But  before  pointing  out  what  may  be  de- 
rived from  this  source,  it  is  necessary  to  say  that  the 
argument  is  not  affected  by  the  discussion  about  the 
Pauline  authorship  of  I.  and  II.  Tim.  and  Titus.  In 
any  case  they  represent  a  later  development,  the  latest 
development  within  the  borders  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment. If  they  are  genuine,  they  point  to  a  second 
imprisonment  of  the  Apostle  and  a  fresh  course  of 
missionary  activity,  not  otherwise  known,  and  take  us 
down  some  years  later  than  the  Acts  or  Philippians.  If 
they  are  written  by  some  one  imitating  the  style  of 
Paul,  embodying  perhaps  passages  of  genuine  letters  to 
Timothy  and  Titus,  they  give  us  a  picture  of  the  Pauline 
churches  after  the  death  of  the  Apostle.1  When  these 
letters  were  written  the  organisation  of  the  local  com- 
munity was  already  crystallised.  In  place  of  the  varied 
organs  of  the  Spirit  and  the  diverse  ministry  which 
characterise  the  letters  to  the  Corinthians,  there  are 
now  two  offices,  named  and  defined,  that  of  Elders 
and  that  of  Deacons.  This  had  evidently  become  the 
fixed  rule  in  the  Pauline  churches.  In  Philippians  i.  i 
the  elders  are  called  Overseers ;  but  we  gather  from 
Acts  xx.  that  the  two  terms  were  interchangeable  ;  for 
in  ver.  17  we  are  told  that  the  elders  of  the  church  of 
Ephesus  came  to  meet  Paul  at  Miletus,  and  in  ver.  28 
Paul  addresses  them  as  overseers,  the  word  which  after- 
wards stood  for  bishop.  In  each  local  community, 
therefore,  at  the  end   of  the  New  Testament  times,  we 

1  See  introduction  to   "The  Pastoral  Epistles"  in  the  Century 
Bible,  p.  46. 


DEVELOPMENT  63 

find  a  body  of  men  (the  number  is  never  prescribed) 
indifferently  designated  Elders  (presbyters)  or  Overseers 
(bishops).  And  they  are  supported  by  another  body, 
the  number  also  not  prescribed,  now  definitely  named 
Deacons.  In  I.  Tim.  iii.  the  qualifications  of  an  elder 
or  bishop  are  described ;  and  a  similar  list  of  qualifica- 
tions is  given  in  Tit.  i.  5-9,  where  the  identity  of  the 
terms  elder  and  bishop  is  shown,  for  elders  are  to  be 
appointed  in  every  city,  and  then  the  requirements 
for  the  office  are  stated  in  the  following  verse,  proceed- 
ing "  for  the  bishop  must  be  blameless."  We  have 
not  then  reached  the  stage  which  we  shall  see  clearly 
marked  in  the  Epistles  of  Ignatius,  the  stage  of 
monarchical  episopacy — that  is,  the  appointment  of  a 
supreme  minister  in  each  congregation  with  the  title 
of  overseer,  or  bishop,  distinguished  from  the  elders, 
or  presbyters.  The  latest  development  reached  in  the 
New  Testament  shows  us  a  board  of  elders  or  over- 
seers directing  the  affairs  of  the  community.1  The 
function  of  the  elders  may  be  inferred  from  their 
qualifications.  It  must  be  noted  at  once  that  the 
primary  qualification  is  goodness.  Office  divorced  from 
character  has  not  yet  suggested  itself  as  a  possibility. 
The  elder  must  be  blameless,  without  reproach,  even  in 
the  estimate  of  outsiders.  He  is  a  married  man,  but 
must  not  have  more  than  one  wife ;  his  children  must 

1  The  position  of  James  in  the  church  at  Jerusalem  pointed  in  the 
direction  of  the  monarchical  episcopate  ;  and  if  the  angels  of  the 
seven  churches  in  the  Apocalypse  are  men,  and  not  the  guardian 
heavenly  spirits,  we  may  argue  that  in  Asia  Minor  the  example  of 
Jerusalem  was  followed. 


64  THE    EARLY    CHURCH 

be  believers  also ;  he  must  rule  his  own  household  well, 
as  an  evidence  that  he  can  rule  well  the  church  of  God. 
He  must  be  an  example  to  the  flock ;  he  must  teach 
Christianity  by  being  a  Christian.  But  the  task  of 
teaching  has  now  devolved  on  the  elder.  We  do  not 
know  whether  the  liberty  of  prophesying  which  at  first 
existed  was  totally  suppressed,  but  the  elders  were  now 
responsible  for  teaching  the  truth  and  for  refuting  error. 
They  hold  a  deposit  of  sound  doctrine,  written  or  un- 
written, from  which  they  cannot  depart  themselves  or 
allow  others  to  depart :  "  holding  to  the  faithful  word 
which  is  according  to  the  teaching  .  .  .  able  both  to  ex- 
hort in  the  sound  doctrine,  and  to  convict  the  gainsayers  " 
(Tit.  i.  9).  The  elders  took  the  place  which,  as  we 
saw,  was  occupied  by  the  elders  in  the  synagogue. 
They  were  the  guardians  and  depositaries  of  the  new 
law,  as  the  Jewish  elders  were  of  the  old.  We  cannot 
yet  discern  any  book  or  books,  even  a  germinal  New 
Testament,  kept  in  the  congregation  as  the  Torah  was 
kept  in  the  synagogue.  The  Apostles'  teaching  was 
still  living  and  fresh  in  every  one's  mind.  Peter's  preach- 
ing, if  tradition  is  correct,  must  have  been  written  down 
by  Mark,  and  copies  of  that  earliest  Gospel  may  have 
been  widely  disseminated.  Letters  of  Apostles,  Paul's, 
Peter's,  John's,  were  known  in  certain  churches,  and 
gradually  copied  and  extended  to  all.  But  the  deposit 
of  teaching  was  possessed  by  every  board  of  elders 
in  some  tangible  form.  Perhaps  the  interesting  little 
book,  the  "  Teaching  of  the  Twelve  Apostles,"  discovered 
by  Bryennios  in  1875,  represents  the  text-book  which 
existed    in   the   churches    before    the    New   Testament 


DEVELOPMENT  65 

assumed  a  germinal  canonical  form  in  the  first  half  of 
the  second  century.  But  however  the  apostolic  teach- 
ing was  recorded,  the  board  of  elders  was  responsible 
for  keeping  it  and  imparting  it  to  the  church. 

The  functions  of  the  deacons  cannot  be  inferred  from 
the  qualifications  (I.  Tim.  iii.  8).  The  moral  require- 
ments are  the  same,  substantially,  as  those  of  the  elders. 
The  phrase  "holding  the  mystery  of  the  faith  in  a  pure 
conscience  "  might  seem  to  imply  that  they  also  in  their 
degree  were  called  upon  to  teach ;  but  this  inference  is 
denied  by  Hort,  whose  comment  on  the  office  of  deacons 
should  be  carefully  studied.  "  The  mystery  of  the 
faith,"  he  says,  "  undoubtedly  a  difficult  phrase,  is  pro- 
bably, as  Weiss  explains  it,  the  secret  constituted  by 
their  own  inner  faith,  not  known  to  men  but  inspiring 
all  their  work ;  and  then  the  stress  lies  on  'in  a  pure 
conscience'  (see  the  association  of  faith  and  a  pure 
or  good  conscience  in  i.  5,  19).  Thus  in  this  clause  a 
true  inward  religion  and  a  true  inward  morality  are 
laid  down  as  required  for  the  office  of  deacons ;  that  is, 
the  external  nature  of  the  services  chiefly  rendered  by 
them  was  not  to  be  taken  as  sanctioning  any  merely  ex- 
ternal efficiency.  The  lowest  service  to  be  rendered  to 
the  Ecclesia  and  to  its  members  would  be  a  delusive  and 
dangerous  service  if  rendered  by  men,  however  otherwise 
active,  who  were  not  themselves  moved  by  the  faith  on 
which  the  Ecclesia  rested,  and  governed  by  its  principles. 
This,  however,  has  nothing  to  do  with  teaching  on  the 
part  of  the  deacons,  to  which  there  is  no  reference  in  the 
whole  passage.  On  the  other  hand,  we  may  safely  say 
that  it  would  have  been  contrary  to  the   spirit  of  the 

E 


66  THE    EARLY    CHURCH 

apostolic  age  to  prohibit  all  teaching  on  the  part  of  any 
deacons  who  had  real  capacity  of  that  kind.  But  this 
would  be  no  part  of  their  official  duty,  and  so  it  naturally 
finds  no  mention  here. 

"The  last  verse,  iii.  13,  has  been  often  under- 
stood to  say  that  excellent  discharge  of  the  duties  of 
a  deacon  would  rightly  entitle  him  to  promotion  to 
a  higher  kind  of  work,  doubtless  that  of  an  elder. 
1  Standing '  undeniably  means  a  step,  and  so  might 
easily  be  used  for  a  grade  of  dignity  or  function.  But 
the  rest  of  the  verse  renders  this  interpretation  un- 
natural ;  and  the  true  sense  doubtless  is  that  deacons 
by  excellent  discharge  of  their  duties  may  win  for  them- 
selves an  excellent  vantage  ground,  a  standing  a  little 
as  it  were  above  the  common  level,  enabling  them  to 
exercise  an  influence  and  moral  authority  to  which  their 
work  as  such  could  not  entitle  them."  * 

It  will  be  observed  from  ver.  n  that  there  were 
deaconesses  as  well  as  deacons,  not  the  wives  of 
deacons,  but  women  elected  to  the  office  on  account  of 
moral  and  spiritual  qualifications.  The  place  of  widows 
in  the  church  (I.  Tim.  v.  1-16)  tempts  one  to  suppose 
that  deaconesses  were  widows,  but  that  identification 
cannot  be  established. 

The  function  of  this  second  order,  the  deacons  and 
deaconesses,  in  the  church  is  never  specifically  de- 
termined. We  cannot  identify  them  with  the  seven  in 
Actsy  and  the  use  of  the  word  in  the  New  Testament  to 
cover  very  various  forms  of  ministry — e.g.  Paul  describes 

1  Hort's  "  The  Christian  Ecclesia,"  pp.  201,  202. 


DEVELOPMENT  67 

himself  once  as  a  deacon — leaves  us  in  much  uncertainty 
about  the  specific  function  entrusted  to  these  officials. 
But  this  seems  clear,  the  deacons  were  the  main  instru- 
ments for  giving  practical  effect  to  the  mutual  sympathy  of 
the  members  of  the  body.  They  visited  the  sick  and 
distributed  alms,  they  sought  the  erring  and  arranged 
for  their  instruction.  In  the  assemblies  of  the  church 
they  managed  the  details  of  the  worship,  attending  to 
the  comfort  and  order  of  the  members.  They  may  have 
been  readers,  and  leaders  of  the  praise.  They  were,  in 
a  word,  the  active  connecting  links  between  the  members 
of  the  community ;  and  the  importance  and  dignity  of 
the  office  cannot  be  ignored. 

The  opening  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Philippians  shows 
that  the  elders  and  deacons  together  formed  a  council 
which  represented  the  whole  church.  And  so  in  the 
"  Teaching  of  the  Twelve  Apostles,"  xv. :  "  Choose  there- 
fore for  yourselves  to  be  bishops  and  deacons,  men 
worthy  of  the  Lord,  meek,  not  lovers  of  money,  &c." 

We  can  detect  also  some  development  in  the 
worship  of  the  church.  The  stress  laid  on  Scripture 
in  II.  Tim.  iii.  16  implies  that  the  Old  Testament 
was  read  in  the  church ;  and  reading  was  evidently 
a  specific  part  of  the  worship  (I.  Tim.  iv.  13).  And 
we  can  surmise  the  beginning  of  that  musical  element 
in  the  worship  which  afterwards  gained  ground,  and 
has  sometimes  run  into  an  excess,  in  which  its  original 
principle  is  forgotten.  Eph.  v.  19  shows  that  the 
assembly  of  the  church  was  accustomed  to  engage  in 
antiphonal  hymns ;  the  gratitude  to  God  for  Christ, 
and   the   joy   in    the    fellowship    found   expression    in 


68  THE    EARLY    CHURCH 

song.  We  do  not  as  yet  perceive  any  instrumental 
music,  borrowed  from  the  older  cultus,  but  it  is 
thought  that  there  are  traces  of  early  Christian  hymns 
in  the  New  Testament.  Especially  I.  Tim.  iii.  16 
looks  in  the  Greek  like  a  fragment  of  verse,  an  antici- 
pation of  such  a  chant  as  the  Te  Deum,  for  the 
clauses  fall  into  a  balanced  measure  which  is  well 
represented  in  Nestle's  Greek  Testament  (British  and 
Foreign  Bible  Society) : — 

"  Who  was  manifest  in  flesh, 
Was  justified  in  Spirit, 
Was  seen  of  angels, 
Was  preached  among  the  nations, 
Was  believed  on  in  the  world, 
Was  taken  up  in  glory." 

Curiously  enough  we  do  not  discern  any  growth 
towards  sacerdotalism  or  any  development  of  the 
sacramental  idea.  Indeed  if  we  are  to  regard  John's 
writings  as  the  latest  glimpse  the  New  Testament 
affords  of  the  church,  we  have  this  very  remarkable 
phenomenon;  the  two  sacraments  of  baptism  and  the 
Supper  are  drawn  back  from  the  prominence  which 
they  at  first  received,  spiritualised,  and  merged  in 
the  general  life  and  growth  of  the  Christian.  Baptism 
is  referred  to  in  John  iii.,  in  order  to  show  that  the 
birth  of  the  soul  must  be  by  the  Spirit,  and  not  by 
water  alone.  The  institution  of  the  Eucharist  is  delibe- 
rately omitted  from  the  narrative  of  the  Last  Supper, 
and  the  spiritual  truth  of  it  is  secured  by  the  discourse 
on  the   bread  of  life   in   chap,   vi.,  where  Jesus  insists 


DEVELOPMENT  69 

that  His  flesh  must  be  eaten  and  His  blood  drunk 
if  we  are  to  have  life,  but  guards  against  the  scandal 
of  literalism  by  saying :  "  The  words  that  I  have 
spoken  unto  you  are  spirit  and  are  life  "  (John  vi.  63). 

But  in  the  picture  of  the  church,  as  the  New  Testament 
leaves  it,  there  are  two  elements  which  demand  some 
discussion.  The  Apostles  are  still  there;  and  over 
and  above  the  organisation  just  described  there  are 
the  nuncios  or  agents  of  the  Apostles,  like  Timothy 
and  Titus,  engaged  in  organising  or  regulating  the 
churches.  How  are  we  to  regard  these  two  factors 
in  the  life  of  the  church  ? 

It  is  one  of  Hort's  most  striking  contributions  to 
our  knowledge  of  the  New  Testament  to  show  indis- 
putably from  the  New  Testament  itself  that  there 
was  no  apostolic  order.1  If  the  Twelve  stand  for 
an  order  and  not  for  all  Christians,  the  Lord's  Supper 
is  only  enjoined  on  the  successors  of  the  Apostles, 
and  not  on  the  Christian  community.  No  functions 
of  the  Apostles  as  such  can  be  discovered,  except  that 
they  were  witnesses  of  the  Resurrection,  and  the 
first  circle  of  believers  that  constituted  the  rudimen- 
tary church.  They  had  no  exceptional  authority,  and 
Paul,  himself  claiming  to  be  an  apostle,  though  not 
one  of  the  Twelve,  speaks  of  them  almost  contemp- 
tuously as  "those  who  seemed  to  be  pillars,"  flatly 
refusing  obedience  to  them  or  connection  with  them, 
if  they    did    not   recognise    Christ    and    Christ's   com- 

1  Hort,  "The  Christian  Ecclesia,"  pp.  30,  39,  55,  65,  84,  133, 
158,  167. 


7o  THE    EARLY    CHURCH 

mandment  as  he  himself  understood  it  (Gal.  ii.  6). 
The  authority  of  Apostles  was  moral,  not  formal,  and 
where  the  moral  weight  declined,  the  authority  dis- 
appeared. Paul  himself,  claiming  in  the  most  unequi- 
vocal way  to  be  an  apostle  on  an  equality  with  the 
Twelve,  never  exercised  any  authority  over  the  churches, 
beyond  that  which  came  from  his  character  and  his 
services.  He  argues  and  pleads,  or  if  he  commands 
it  is  solely  on  the  ground  of  personal  obligations. 
So  far  as  the  apostolate  was  an  office  of  permanent 
continuance,  it  is  represented  by  men  or  women  who 
are  endued  with  the  Spirit  for  the  missionary  work 
of  extending  the  Kingdom  and  founding  new  churches. 
This  is  evident  from  Acts  xiv.  4-14,  where  Paul  and 
Barnabas,  engaged  in  the  missionary  task,  are  termed 
apostles.1  In  II.  Cor.  viii.  24  the  emissaries  of  Paul 
who  were  engaged  in  similar  work  are  termed  apostles 
(R.V.  margin).  In  Phil.  ii.  25  the  word  "apostle" 
loses  all  special  significance,  and  means,  as  it  does 
etymologically,  a  messenger.  (Cf.  Heb.  iii.  1;  John 
xiii.  16.) 

The  most  careful  study  of  the  word  "  apostle "  in 
the  New  Testament  is  made  by  Harnack,  "Expansion 
of  Christianity,"  i.  398  seq.\  "Paul  holds  fast  to  the 
wider  conception  of  the  apostolate,  but  the  Twelve 
Disciples  form  in  his  view  its  original  nucleus."  Gradu- 
ally in  the  sub-apostolic  age  the  term  was  restricted  to 
the  original  Twelve  and  Paul. 

Harnack  has  shown  that  Judaism  had  its  apostles, 

1  Rom.  xvi.  7,  Andronicus  and  Junias  seem  to  be  "apostles." 


DEVELOPMENT  71 

who  were  sent  from  Jerusalem  to  supervise  the  Diaspora, 
to  collect  money,  and  to  hold  the  scattered  Jews  in 
the  unity  of  Israel.  Thus  Paul  was  an  apostle  of 
Judaism  at  the  time  when  he  was  called  to  be  an 
apostle  of  Christ.  The  three  ministerial  names,  apostles, 
prophets,  and  teachers,  might  all  therefore  have  been 
borrowed  from  contemporary  Judaism. 

When  therefore  the  church  is  said  to  be  built  upon 
the  Apostles  (Eph.  ii.  20)  it  is  impossible  to  think  of 
a  peculiar  order,  transmitting  peculiar  powers.  The 
Apostles  who  form  the  foundation  are  the  witnesses 
of  the  fact  of  Christ;  so  far  as  their  testimony  is 
written  in  the  New  Testament,  those  writings  take 
the  place  of  the  Apostles  in  the  subsequent  periods 
of  the  church.  So  far  as  their  office  is  continued, 
it  is  to  be  sought  in  the  missionaries  of  the  church, 
Augustine,  Patrick,  Columba,  Raymund  Lull,  Xavier 
Schwartz,  Carey,  Martyn,  and  that  long  roll  of  saints 
and  martyrs  which  carry  on  the  mission  of  the  Twelve, 
and  of  Paul  and  Barnabas. 

Timothy  and  Titus  stand  in  a  unique  position  in 
the  New  Testament,  and  some  have  sought  to  find 
in  them  the  earliest  example  of  "bishops"  in  the 
later  episcopal  sense  of  the  word.  Because  they 
appoint  elders  in  new  communities  (Titus  i.  5),  it  is 
supposed  that  we  have  here  the  beginning  of  episcopal 
ordination.  But  the  contention  cannot  be  sustained. 
The  relation  of  Titus  to  Crete  or  of  Timothy  to 
Ephesus  is  only  temporary.  They  are  the  agents  of 
Paul  entrusted  with  a  special  task.  So  far  from  being 
in   a   position    of  superiority   over   the    churches,   they 


72  THE    EARLY    CHURCH 

are  young  men,  whose  youth  the  elders  are  in  danger 
of  despising,  and  they  exercise  their  authority  in 
organising  and  teaching,  solely  by  being  themselves 
ensamples  of  the  flock. 

Ordination  was  not  a  specific,  still  less  a  super- 
natural, rite,  conferring  power  or  authority.  It  was 
only  the  laying  on  of  hands,  the  act  symbolical  of 
blessing,  the  sign  by  which  the  congregation,  through 
its  leaders,  appointed  men  to  certain  duties.  "The 
only  passages  of  the  New  Testament,"  says  Hort,1  "  in 
which  laying  on  of  hands  is  connected  with  an  act 
answering  to  ordination  are  four,  viz.  Acts  vi.  6,  the 
laying  on  of  the  hands  of  the  Twelve  on  the  Seven 
at  Jerusalem  at  their  first  appointment ;  Acts  xiii.  3, 
the  laying  on  of  the  hands  of  the  representatives  of 
the  Ecclesia  of  Antioch  on  Barnabas  and  Saul  in 
consequence  of  a  prophetic  monition  sending  them 
forth  ;  and  the  two  passages  about  Timothy  (I.  Tim.  iv. 
14;  II.  Tim.  i.  6),  likewise  due  in  all  probability  to 
another  prophetic  monition  sending  him  forth  on  a 
unique  mission  intimately  connected  with  that  former 
mission.  Jewish  usage  (the  Semichah,  Num.  xxvii.  18, 
23)  in  the  case  of  Rabbis  and  their  disciples  renders 
it  highly  probable  that,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  laying  on 
of  hands  was  largely  practised  in  the  ecclesia?  of  the 
apostolic  age  as  a  rite  introductory  to  ecclesiastical 
office.  But  as  the  New  Testament  tells  us  no  more 
than  what  has  been  already  mentioned,  it  can  hardly 
be   likely  that  any  essential   principle  was  held  to  be 

1  "The  Christian  Ecclesia,"  p.  215. 


DEVELOPMENT  73 

involved  in  it.  It  was  enough  that  an  Ecclesia  should, 
in  modern  phrase,  be  organised,  or  in  the  really  clearer 
apostolic  phrase  be  treated  as  a  body  made  up  of 
members  with  a  diversity  of  functions ;  and  that  all 
things  should  be  done  decently  and  in  order." 

The  most  astonishing  thing  in  the  churches  of  the 
New  Testament  is  the  absence  of  priests.  Our  English 
word  "  priest  "  is  derived  from  "  presbyter  "  (elder) ;  and 
in  that  sense  the  priest  has  New  Testament  justifica- 
tion. But  the  presbyter  of  the  New  Testament  has 
no  sacerdotal  functions.  There  is  no  sacrifice  to  offer, 
no  mediation  necessary,  because  Christ  Himself,  for 
ever  present  in  the  Spirit,  is  the  one  sacrifice,  the 
sole  mediator.  The  whole  community  is,  in  Peter's 
phrase,  "  a  holy  priesthood,  to  offer  up  spiritual  sacri- 
fices, acceptable  to  God  through  Jesus  Christ"  (I.  Pet. 
ii.  5) ;  but  neither  does  Peter  claim  to  be  a  priest  nor  call 
his  fellow-elders  priests.  When  through  Jewish  and 
pagan  influences  sacerdotalism  crept  into  the  church  it 
sought  in  vain  for  authorisation  from  the  New  Testa- 
ment. The  straits  to  which  the  defenders  of  sacer- 
dotalism were  put  to  justify  their  practice  out  of  the 
apostolic  writings  may  be  judged  by  this,  that  the  only 
passages  which  can  be  cited,  against  the  unbroken  testi- 
mony of  the  remainder  of  the  book,  are,  "  We  have  an 
altar"  (Heb.  xiii.  10),  and  "This  do"  (Luke  xxii.  19). 
This  is  indeed  a  slender  foundation  for  sacerdotal 
claims.  For  the  altar  is  shown  to  be  spiritual  by  the 
nature  of  the  sacrifice  offered  on  it,  viz.  "A  sacrifice 
of  praise,  that  is,  the  fruit  of  lips  which  make  confes- 
sion to  His  name"  (Heb.  xiii.  15).     And  "This  do"  is 


74  THE    EARLY    CHURCH 

drawn  into  the  desperate  defence  of  a  sacrificial  priest- 
hood by  the  accidental  circumstance  that  in  Greek  the 
word  "to  do  "  has  a  technical  meaning  in  relation  to 
religion,  viz.  "to  sacrifice."  By  giving  to  the  common 
word  "do"  this  exceptional  meaning  in  the  institution 
of  the  Supper,  sacerdotalism  maintains  that  Jesus  meant 
"this  sacrifice.'' 

But  in  the  church  of  the  New  Testament  there 
is  no  room  for  priest  or  altar  or  sacrifice.  Christ  is 
Himself  too  manifest ;  He  is  the  Priest,  He  the  Altar, 
and  He  the  sacrifice.  The  Spirit  manifests  Him  not 
in  external  rites  or  symbols  but  in  the  spirits  of 
believing  men  and  women,  who  speak  and  live,  who 
love  and  serve,  exhorting,  teaching,  praying,  praising, 
ministering,  giving,  in  such  a  way  as  to  manifest 
Christ  both  to  one  another  and  to  him  who  occupies 
the  seat  of  the  unbeliever.  Sacerdotalism  is  a  reversion 
to  type,  not  a  development  of  Christianity. 

§  3.  The  development  in  the  New  Testament  of 
the  idea  of  the  church  as  a  whole  remains  to  be 
considered.  The  church  in  the  concrete  is  always 
the  local  community  of  believers  organised  under  the 
rule  of  elders  and  deacons.  We  never  hear  of  "the 
church  of  Christ,"  only  of  "  the  churches  of  Christ '" 
(Rom.  xvi.  16).  Once  where  the  phrase,  "the  church 
©f  God,"  occurs,  some  authorities  read  "the  church 
of  the  Lord"  (Acts  xx.  28).  But  the  church  in 
esse  is  only  the  sum  total  of  the  local  communities,  so 
that  the  current  mode  of  speech  is  "the  churches," 
not  "the  church"  (Acts  ix.  31,  xv.  41,  xvi.  5  ;  Rom  xvi. 
4,  xvi.   16  •  I.  Cor.  vii.   17,  xi.   16,  xiv.  33,   34,  xvi.   i, 


DEVELOPMENT  75 

19;  II.  Cor.  viii.  1,  18,  19,  23,  24,  xi.  8,  28,  xii. 
13;  Gal.  i.  2,  22;  Phil.  iv.  15;  I.  Thess.  ii.  14;  II. 
Thess.  i.  4;  Rev.  i.  4,  11,  20,  xxii.  16).  And  yet 
the  keynote  struck  in  the  earliest  use  of  the  word 
"church"  in  the  New  Testament  (Matt.  xvi.  18)  never 
fails  to  vibrate  throughout.  As  we  follow  the  books 
of  the  New  Testament  chronologically  we  become 
increasingly  conscious  that  Christ  can  and  does  speak 
of  His  church  as  a  whole.  Whatever  may  be  the 
relation  of  the  ideal  whole  to  the  empirical  parts,  His 
church  is  one  edifice  rising  on  the  sure  foundation  of 
His  Sonship  and  Messiahship,  constituted  in  the  first 
instance  by  the  confession  of  His  original  disciples,  reared 
by  living  stone  upon  living  stone,  as  one  after  another 
receives  the  same  faith  and  makes  the  same  confession. 

The  Epistles  to  the  Ephesians  and  Colossians  seemed 
designed  to  make  this  clear,  and  more  than  one  echo 
in  Hebrews  and  the  Pastorals  and  the  Apocalypse  indi- 
cate how  the  saying  ascribed  to  Jesus,  "On  this  rock 
I  will  build  My  church,"  was  engrained  in  the  thought 
of  Christians.  Thus  when  Paul  speaks  of  the  Body 
of  Christ,  he  has  not  in  view  the  local  church,  but 
rather  the  one  church  universal.  It  is  of  this  august 
body  that  Christ  is  the  head  (Eph.  i.  22).  This 
church  is  described  as  a  chaste  bride,  adorned,  and 
plighted  to  Christ.  In  that  fair  body  there  are  the 
indefinite  varieties  of  individual  character  and  func- 
tion ;  but  they  are  organically  united.  Each  person  like 
a  limb  or  an  artery  or  a  nerve  of  the  body  is  essen- 
tial to  the  whole.  There  is  no  division  or  schism  in 
the   body ;    it  can  only  be  one  and   undivided.     This 


76  THE    EARLY    CHURCH 

church,  the  Bride  or  Body  of  Christ,  is  the  fulness 
of  Him  that  filleth  all ;  it  is  the  final  cause  of  creation ; 
to  achieve  it  men  came  to  be,  were  tried  and  fell, 
were  redeemed  by  Christ  and  gathered  together  in  one. 
The  final  manifestation  of  this  elect  company,  the  new 
Jerusalem  descending  out  of  heaven,  will  be  the  palin- 
genesia  of  the  earth,  the  justification  of  its  existence. 

This  is  the  church  against  which  the  gates  of  Hades 
cannot  prevail.  It  is  through  Christ  incorporate  in 
the  life  of  God,  and  shows  His  purity,  His  power, 
and  His  immortality.  This  great  and  transcendental 
idea  of  the  church  is  so  presented  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment, that,  despite  all  the  errors  and  crudities  of  the 
churches  in  being,  it  remains  as  the  dominating  vision, 
the  first  and  the  final  idea.  Whenever  it  is  mentioned, 
the  writer  glows  with  a  holy  enthusiasm ;  the  passion 
throbs  through  the  words  and  is  not  weakened  by 
centuries.  The  church  so  conceived  is  "  the  church 
of  the  living  God,  the  pillar  and  ground  of  the  truth  " 
(I.  Tim  iii.  15).  It  is  "the  general  assembly  and 
church  of  the  firstborn  who  are  enrolled  in  heaven" 
(Heb.  xii.  23).  It  is  the  loved  Bride  of  Christ  ;  "  Even 
as  Christ  also  loved  the  church  and  gave  Himself  up 
for  it;  that  He  might  sanctify  it,  having  cleansed  it 
by  the  washing  of  water  with  the  word,  that  He  might 
present  the  church  to  Himself  a  glorious  church, 
not  having  spot  or  wrinkle  or  any  such  thing ;  but 
that  it  should  be  holy  and  without  blemish"  (Eph.  v. 

25-27)- 

The  relation  between  this  spotless,  heavenly,  unified 
church  and    the  local  societies,   so    strained  and  torn 


DEVELOPMENT  77 

with  human  sin  and  failure,  is  not  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment determined.  When  we  begin  to  follow  the 
development  of  the  church  beyond  the  border  of  the 
Canon,  we  find  that  the  hope  sprang  up  of  realis- 
ing this  transcendental  unity  by  means  of  a  powerful 
organisation.  The  student  of  ecclesiastical  history 
must  always  raise  the  question,  Was  this  very  natural 
and  human  idea  the  correct  one?  Was  it  the  fulfil- 
ment of  the  intention  in  the  mind  of  Christ,  implicit 
in  the  heart  of  the  new  religion  ? 

The  local  church  was  unified  in  a  bishop.  The 
bishops  were  unified  under  metropolitans  and  patriarchs. 
Finally  they  were  all  unified  in  the  autocracy  of  one  in- 
fallible Pope.  Thus  the  endeavour  was  made  to  realise 
the  church  which  is  the  pillar  and  ground  of  the  truth, 
the  general  assembly  of  the  firstborn,  the  spotless  Bride 
of  Christ. 

The  result  in  the  judgment  of  the  world  has  discredited 
the  method ;  if  the  method  was  the  thought  of  Christ 
and  the  essence  of  Christianity,  Christianity  itself  is 
discredited,  and  must  perish  in  the  disappointment  and 
indignation  of  mankind.  But  a  great  hope  remains. 
Perhaps  the  method  was  wrong.  Perhaps  it  was  a  carnal 
and  earthly  interpretation  of  a  spiritual  idea.  At  any 
rate  for  the  comfort  of  those  who  believe,  the  New  Testa- 
ment itself,  the  original  witness  to  Christianity,  the 
thought  of  our  Lord  and  His  apostles,  stands  wholly 
acquitted  of  the  mistake,  if  mistake  it  is.  In  it  there 
are  the  local  churches  coming  into  being,  and  there  is 
the  spiritual  transcendental  church  united  in  Christ 
and  Christ  alone.     But  it  knows   nothing  of  bishops, 


78  THE    EARLY    CHURCH 

patriarchs,  metropolitans,  and  popes;  it  never  suggests 
authoritative  councils,  and  the  two  swords  of  temporal 
and  spiritual  authority. 

If  the  event  shows  that  man  in  his  blindness  has  erred, 
and  taken  a  pitiably  false  way  of  realising  the  splendid 
ideal,  there  is  nothing  to  prevent  him  from  going  back 
to  the  sources,  and  there  reading  with  purged  eyes  the 
purpose  of  Christ  and  the  Apostles.  He  may  avert  his 
eyes  from  the  tragic  stream  of  ecclesiastical  history,  the 
tale  of  strife  and  ambition,  of  superstition  and  tyranny, 
of  hypocrisy  and  corruption,  and  may  see  that  from  the 
beginning  the  kingdom  came  without  observation,  and 
the  Bride  of  Christ  was  gathered  in  the  lowly  and  simple 
believers  of  all  ages.  There  is  cause  for  sorrow  and 
contrition,  but  not  for  despair. 


CHAPTER    IV 

THE  SUB-APOSTOLIC    DEVELOPMENT 

§  i.  A  scanty  literature  has  come  down  to  us  from  the 
time  immediately  succeeding  the  apostolic  age.  First 
and  most  important  is  the  "Teaching  of  the  Twelve 
Apostles,"  which,  though  constantly  referred  to,  and 
in  early  times  classed  with  the  canonical  books  (e.g. 
Clement  of  Alexandria  calls  it  "  Scripture  "),  had  dis- 
appeared, until  Bryennios  discovered  it  in  the  library  at 
Constantinople  in  1875.  Then  we  have  the  "Epistle 
of  Barnabas"  and  the  "Shepherd  of  Hermas,"  which 
Eusebius  ("  Eccl.  Hist.,"  hi.,  chap,  xxv.)  places  along 
with  the  "  Teaching  of  the  Twelve  Apostles,"  amongst 
the  Apocryphal  books  of  the  New  Testament.  The 
two  letters  of  Clement,  the  letters  of  Ignatius,  the 
Martyrdoms  of  Ignatius  and  of  Polycarp,  the  letters  of 
Polycarp  and  the  letter  to  Diognetus,  complete  the  list. 
This  literature,  slender  in  quantity,  is  still  more  meagre 
in  quality.  It  seems  to  be  divided  by  a  great  gulf  from 
the  writings  of  the  New  Testament,  and  serves  as  a  foil 
to  bring  out  the  inspiration  and  authority  of  the  Canon. 
It  furnishes  us  with  no  new  truths,  no  important  develop- 
ments of  doctrine,  no  guide  to  conduct,  which  cannot  be 

79 


8o  THE    EARLY    CHURCH 

found,  more  convincingly  stated,  in  the  New  Testament. 
To  study  it  is  like  coming  to  the  picture-gallery  at 
Hampton  Court  after  spending  a  day  in  the  National 
Gallery.  The  New  Testament  is  a  gallery  of  priceless 
originals,  selected  and  tested ;  the  sub-apostolic  litera- 
ture is  a  collection  of  feeble  copies  and  imitations. 
Nevertheless  this  sub-apostolic  literature  serves  a  useful 
purpose.  The  quotations  in  it  from  the  New  Testament 
furnish  the  earliest  external  evidence  for  the  canonical 
books.  And  the  notices  of  church  order,  organisation, 
and  worship,  enable  us  to  fill  to  some  degree  the  gap 
between  the  church  of  the  New  Testament  and  the 
church  of  the  second  century,  in  some  respects  so 
different,  which  appears  in  the  writings  of  Justin  Martyr, 
Hippolytus,  Irenaeus,  Tertullian,  and  Clement  of  Alex- 
andria. Overlapping  in  all  probability  the  canonical 
books,  and  taking  us  down  into  the  middle  of  the  second 
century,  the  Apostolic  Fathers,  as  they  are  called,  en- 
able us  better  to  understand  the  development,  which 
in  its  inception  has  been  traced  in  the  New  Testament 
itself. 

It  is  not  necessary  for  our  purpose  to  examine  these 
writings  thoroughly.  That  has  recently  been  done  with 
some  care  by  Mr.  Durell  following  on  the  work  done 
by  Hort  in  "  The  Christian  Ecclesia." l  But  we  may 
endeavour  to  summarise  the  conclusions  which  may 
be  drawn  from  these  intrinsically  inferior  books. 

§  2.  First  of  all  we  look  at  the  "  Teaching  of  the  Twelve 
Apostles,"  or  as  it  is  conveniently  called  in  the  Greek,  the 

1  "The  Historic  Church,"  by  J.  C.  V.  Durell,  B.D.  (Cambridge 
University  Press). 


DEVELOPMENT  81 

Didache.  Impossible  as  it  is  to  think  that  this  jejune 
document  represents  the  teaching  of  Paul  or  of  John,  or 
even  of  Peter,  we  are  yet  forced  to  believe  that  it  pre- 
sents a  faithful  picture  of  the  churches,  or  at  least  of 
many  churches,  as  they  were,  when  the  original  Apostles 
had  gone,  and  the  church  began  to  feel  her  way  towards 
a  permanent  constitution.  The  picture  is  that  of  inde- 
pendent churches,  knit  together  by  the  possession  of 
a  common  doctrine,  and  by  the  visits  of  itinerating 
preachers,  who  are  called  apostles  and  prophets  (chap.xi.). 
But  the  idea  of  the  church  in  its  unity  is  obviously 
present ;  for  in  the  Eucharistic  prayer,  the  language  is 
like  that  of  Ephesians :  "  Remember,  O  Lord,  Thy  church 
to  deliver  her  from  all  evil,  and  make  her  perfect  in 
Thy  love,  and  gather  her  together  from  the  four  winds, 
sanctified  for  Thy  kingdom  which  Thou  hast  prepared 
for  her ;  for  Thine  is  the  power  and  the  glory  for  ever  " 
(chap.  x.).  The  church  ideally  is  one,  but  the  churches, 
in  comparative  isolation  from  one  another,  are  the  only 
organisation.  There  is  no  central,  or  even  provincial, 
government.  The  "  Apostles,"  who  form  a  connecting 
link  between  the  churches,  are  like  the  original  Apostles 
only  in  name.  They  are  woefully  fallen  from  their 
authority  and  dignity ;  for  the  chief  thought  of  the 
Didache  is  to  test  them  ;  they  are  to  be  received  and 
even  fed  for  two  days  ;  but  if  they  propose  to  stay  for 
a  third  day,  or  if  they  ask  for  money,  they  are  to  be 
regarded  as  false  prophets.  This  suggests  that  the  im- 
mediate successors  of  the  Apostles  were  a  burden  rather 
than  a  help  to  the  churches ;  and  if  the  Didache  can 
be  regarded  as  the  authentic  Teaching  of  the  Apostles,  it 


82  THE    EARLY    CHURCH 

represents  the  Apostles,  not  as  securing  the  authority  of 
their  successors,  but  as  protecting  the  churches  against 
them.  Special  stress  is  laid  on  the  itinerant  visitors,  if 
they  wish  to  remain  in  a  church,  working  with  their 
own  hands  at  their  craft ;  if  they  refuse  to  do  this  they 
are  called,  in  a  remarkable  Greek  word,  "  Christ- 
traffickers,"  people  who  make  a  merchandise  of  Christ 
(chap.  xii.).  Dante  might  have  read  the  Didache  when 
he  describes  the  Rome  of  the  fourteenth  century  as  the 
place  where  Christ  is  trafficked  all  day  long — 

"  Dove  tutto  di  si  merca  Christo." 

At  the  same  time,  as  in  the  New  Testament,  a  true 
prophet  or  a  true  teacher,  who  stands  the  tests  and 
settles  down  in  a  church,  may  be  supported  by  the 
first-fruit  offerings  of  the  people  (chap.  xiii.).  This  is  all 
that  is  said  about  the  organisation  of  the  church  as  a 
whole.  The  rest  refers  only  to  the  individual  church, 
the  local  congregation. 

The  community  is  autonomous.  It  elects  its  own 
officers.  The  word  for  election,  signifying  to  hold  out 
the  hand,  is  that  used  in  the  New  Testament  (see  p.  40 ; 
II.  Cor.  viii.  19;  Acts  xiv.  23;  Titus  i.  5).  The  officers, 
as  in  Philippians,  are  called  "  bishops  and  deacons." 
Their  qualifications  remind  us  of  the  Pastoral  Epistles. 
"  Elect  therefore  for  yourselves  bishops  and  deacons 
worthy  of  the  Lord,  men  meek  and  free  from  covetous- 
ness  and  true  and  approved,  for  they  too  minister  to  you 
the  ministry  of  the  prophets  and  teachers.  Do  not 
therefore  despise  them,  for  they  are  the  honoured  among 


DEVELOPMENT  83 

you  with  the  prophets  and  teachers"  (chap.  xv.). 
Clearly  the  bishops  and  deacons  are  rather  the  servants 
than  the  rulers  of  the  congregation,  chosen  for  their 
moral  qualifications,  and  supported  by  the  voluntary 
respect  due  to  their  character.  Nothing  is  said  of  their 
powers ;  baptism  and  the  Supper  are  not  in  any  special 
way  connected  with  them. 

The  worship  and  ordinances  are  still  thoroughly  con- 
gregational, such  as  we  have  seen  them  in  the  New 
Testament.  But  here  for  the  first  time  baptism  is  de- 
scribed and  regulated.  Only  adults  are  baptized,  after 
due  instruction  and  a  fast  of  one  or  two  days,  observed 
by  baptizer  and  baptized  together.  The  baptismal 
formula  is  that  of  Matt,  xxviii.  19.  Baptism  is  immer- 
sion; the  water  may  be  hot  or  cold.  If  there  is  not 
enough  water,  aspersion  may  be  substituted  :  "  Pour  the 
water  on  the  head  thrice  in  the  name  of  the  Father  and 
Son  and  Holy  Spirit "  (chap.  vii.). 

Fasting  is  enjoined  :  oddly  enough  the  only  distinction 
from  "  the  hypocrites,"  presumably  the  Pharisees  (Luke 
xviii.  12),  is  that,  while  they  fasted  on  the  second  and 
fifth,  Christians  are  to  fast  on  the  fourth  and  the  sixth 
days,  of  the  week.  The  prayer  is  the  Lord's  Prayer,  and 
it  is  to  be  repeated  thrice  a  day. 

The  Lord's  Supper  is  called  the  Eucharist ;  it  is  still 
as  in  I.  Cor.  a  meal,  an  agape,  and  there  is  no  sacerdotal 
or  sacrificial  element  in  it.  As  the  earliest  description 
of  this  sacrament  after  St.  Paul,  this  passage  is  of  peculiar 
interest.  First  comes  a  thanksgiving  for  the  cup  :  "  We 
thank  Thee,  our  Father,  for  the  holy  vine  of  Thy  servant 
David  which  Thou  hast  made  known  to  us  through  Thy 


84  THE    EARLY    CHURCH 

servant  Jesus ;  to  Thee  be  glory  for  ever."  Then  for 
the  broken  bread :  "  We  thank  Thee,  our  Father,  for 
the  life  and  knowledge  which  Thou  hast  made  known 
to  us  through  Thy  servant  Jesus ;  to  Thee  be  glory  for 
ever.  As  this  broken  bread  was  scattered  upon  the 
mountains,  and  being  gathered  together  became  one,  so 
let  Thy  church  be  gathered  together  from  the  ends  of 
the  earth  into  Thy  kingdom ;  for  Thine  is  the  glory  and 
the  power  through  Jesus  Christ  for  ever." 

Then  follows  a  warning  that  only  the  baptized  may 
eat  and  drink  of  the  Eucharist,  for  the  Lord  said,  "  Give 
not  that  which  is  holy  unto  the  dogs"  (chap.  ix.). 
When  all  had  eaten  and  drunk  to  the  full — for  it  was 
a  regular  meal — another  thanksgiving  followed  for  the 
food,  and  especially  for  the  spiritual  meat.  "  But  to  us 
Thou  hast  granted  spiritual  food  and  drink  and  eternal 
life  through  Thy  servant."  The  thanksgiving  ended 
with  the  Christian  watchword:  Maranatha  ("Come, 
Lord").     {Cf.  I.  Cor.  xvi.  22.) 

This  then  was  the  Supper  in  the  beginning,  just 
after  the  days  of  the  Apostles.  The  change  which  has 
taken  place  in  Justin  Martyr's  day  is  extraordinary  and 
rapid  ;  it  is  a  change  of  which  the  apostolic  and  the  sub- 
apostolic  writers  give  no  indication. 

The  assembly  on  the  Lord's  Day  is  prescribed.  The 
object  of  it  is  to  break  bread  and  to  give  thanks.  This 
must  be  preceded  by  a  confession  of  sins,  in  order  that 
the  sacrifice  may  be  pure.  Every  one  must  be  recon- 
ciled to  his  fellow  :  "  That  your  sacrifice  be  not  denied ; 
for  this  is  that  which  was  spoken  by  the  Lord :  In  every 
place  and  time  offer  to  Me  a  pure  sacrifice ;  for  I  am  a 


DEVELOPMENT  85 

great  king,  saith  the  Lord,  and  My  name  is  wonderful 
among  the  Gentiles"  (Mai.  i.  n,  14).  This  Old  Testa- 
ment text  is  doubtless  the  pivot  on  which  the  change 
from  a  meal  to  a  sacrifice  turns.  The  change  is  not  so 
startling  when  we  remember  that  in  the  old  Semitic 
religions  the  meal  and  the  sacrifice  are  identical  (Robert- 
son Smith,  "  The  Religion  of  the  Semites  "). 

§  3.  From  the  Didache  we  may  pass  to  the  witness 
of  Clement  of  Rome,  Ignatius,  and  Polycarp. 

The  two  letters  of  Clement — though  the  second  is 
rather  a  homily  than  a  letter — are  found  in  the  Codex 
Alexandrinus  of  the  New  Testament  (fifth  century), 
though,  as  they  follow  the  Apocalypse,  Funk  infers 
that  they  were  not  regarded  as  in  the  Canon.  Still 
they  had  a  great  vogue  and  authority  in  the  early  age 
of  the  church.  They  were  read  in  public  worship, 
and  Clement  of  Alexandria  refers  to  his  namesake 
as  "our  apostle."  The  epistle  belongs  to  the  end 
of  the  first  century,  and  may  therefore  be  as  early 
as  the  later  New  Testament  books.  The  homily  is 
usually  placed  in  the  second  quarter  of  the  second 
century.  In  the  first  letter  the  local  church  is  an 
organic  unity,  and  Clement  writes  to  the  church  of 
Corinth  as  the  mouthpiece  of  the  church  of  Rome : 
"  The  Church  of  God  which  sojourneth  in  Rome  sends 
greeting  to  the  Church  of  God  which  sojourneth  in 
Corinth."  The  local  churches  are  united  in  the  one 
church,  not  by  an  organised  hierarchy,  but  simply 
by  the  fraternal  relations,  expressed  now  by  such 
letters  as  the  one  before  us. 

The  local  church   corresponds  to  the   description  in 


36  THE    EARLY    CHURCH 

I.  Pet.  of  the  "holy  priesthood."  There  is  but  one 
priest,  Jesus  Christ;  the  congregation  through  Him 
offers  up  "  offerings  and  ministrations."  The  part  of 
the  ministers  in  the  sacrifice  of  the  church  is  not 
specified,  for  it  is  not  possible  to  see  in  the  general 
phrase  about  the  elders,  "those  who  have  blamelessly 
and  holily  offered  the  gifts  of  the  episcopate  (over- 
seeing)" in  chap,  xliv.,  any  reference  to  a  special 
part  taken  in  the  cultus.  Ministers  and  people  are 
still  regarded  as  one,  forming  the  royal  priesthood. 
The  ministers  are  called  indifferently  elders  and  bishops, 
with  the  subordinate  order  of  deacons ;  but  they  are 
not  priests.  On  the  contrary,  each  man  in  his  own 
order  is  to  offer  the  Eucharist  to  God  (chap.  xli.). 

The  transition,  however,  from  the  control  of  the 
Apostles  to  the  normal  management  of  the  churches 
is  described  in  a  famous  passage  which  may  be  given 
in  full :  "  And  our  apostles  knew  through  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ  that  there  will  be  strife  over  the  name 
of  episcopacy "  (or  overseering).  "  For  that  reason, 
having  received  perfect  foresight,  they  constituted  the 
aforesaid,  and  then  gave  an  ordinance,  that  when 
they  should  have  fallen  asleep,  other  tried  men  should 
succeed  to  their  ministry.  Those  therefore  who  were 
constituted  by  the  apostles  or  afterwards  by  other 
men  of  repute,  with  the  consent  of  the  whole  church, 
and  who  have  blamelessly  served  the  flock  of  Christ 
with  humility,  peaceably  and  not  illiberally,  having 
received  the  testimony  of  all  many  times,  we  cannot 
think  it  right  to  depose  from  the  ministry"  (chap, 
xliv.   1-3).     This  is  most  interesting.     It  suggests  that 


DEVELOPMENT  87 

as  Titus  appointed  elders  in  all  the  churches,  so 
the  Apostles  of  the  first  age  left  the  churches  supplied 
with  a  succession  of  men  who  would  undertake  the 
management  of  affairs.  It  also  confirms  the  principles 
which  are  found  in  the  New  Testament,  that  the 
elders  and  deacons  were  approved  by  the  church 
itself,  and  held  their  position  on  the  ground  of  their 
character,  supported  by  the  goodwill  of  the  people. 
Clement's  object  in  writing  to  Corinth  is  to  prevent 
the  popular  movement  against  men  appointed  in  this 
way.  In  his  effort  to  defend  certain  ejected  ministers 
he  gives  the  first  hint  of  indefeasible  rights  and  a 
transmitted  apostolic  authority  in  the  ministry. 

But  in  Clement  of  Rome  there  is  no  hint  of  a 
single  bishop  over  the  local  church.  The  bishops 
are  still  only  the  board  of  elders.  The  elders  are  not 
priests ;  their  functions  are  still  the  same  as  in  the 
New  Testament,  and  the  consent  of  the  church  is 
considered  vital  to  their  position  and  authority. 

The  homily  of  Clement  (II.  Clement)  belonging 
to  a  later  date — say,  a.d.  140 — agrees  with  the  Epistle 
of  Clement  in  knowing  only  elders  and  no  bishop 
in  the  monarchical  sense.  But  the  interesting  little 
work  contains  a  striking  passage  on  the  spiritual 
church,  founded  before  the  sun  and  moon.  "A 
living  church,"  he  says,  "is  the  body  of  Christ." 
Paul's  idea  of  marriage  is  in  his  mind.  "Christ  is 
the  male,  the  church  the  female."  Then,  with  a 
mixture  of  metaphor,  he  says  that  the  pre-existent 
church  was  manifested  in  the  body  of  Christ;  and 
the   body  is  left  behind  in  the  world  as  the   church. 


THE    EARLY    CHURCH 


He  who  violates  the  church  the  body,  violates  Christ 
the  Spirit. 

The  letters  of  Ignatius  are  surprising,  because 
suddenly  and  with  extraordinary  vehemence  they  show 
us  the  local  church  unified  in  a  single  minister,  called 
now  a  bishop,  and  distinguished  from  the  elders. 
As  Ignatius  was  martyred  in  a.d.  107,  the  letters, 
if  genuine,  show  us  the  church  in  Antioch,  and  the 
churches  in  Asia  Minor,  as  they  were  after  the  death 
of  the  Apostle  John.  Possibly  the  fact  in  the  New 
Testament  which  best  prepares  us  for  this  advance 
in  church  government  is  the  series  of  letters  to  the 
seven  churches  in  the  Apocalypse.  The  "  angel  of  the 
church  "  is  evidently  the  representative  of  the  church. 
And  what  the  angel  of  the  church  is  there,  the  bishop 
is  in  Ignatius.  The  interest  of  this  connection  is 
deepened  by  the  fact  that  Ignatius  writes  to  two  of  the 
seven  churches,  Smyrna  and  Philadelphia.  At  Ephesus 
the  bishop  is  Onesimus ;  at  Magnesia,  Damas ;  at 
Tralles,  Polybius ;  at  Smyrna,  Polycarp.  The  bishop, 
or  angel,  of  Philadelphia  is  not  named.  Curiously 
enough  the  letter  to  Rome  does  not  refer  to  the  bishop 
of  that  church,  and  indeed  no  mention  of  any  kind  is 
made  of  the  ministry  there. 

In  the  letters  of  Ignatius  the  bishop,  or  head  of 
the  local  church,  is  the  centre  of  unity,  the  represen- 
tative of  Christ.  To  break  away  from  the  communion 
of  the  bishop  is  schism,  though  he  has  not  gone 
the  length  of  saying  that  there  is  no  salvation  for  the 
schismatic.  On  the  contrary  he  thinks  that  even  the 
prophets  of  the  Old    Testament   were    "  saved  in   the 


DEVELOPMENT  89 

unity  of  Jesus  Christ  .  .  .  approved  of  Jesus  Christ, 
and  numbered  together  in  the  Gospel  of  our  common 
hope"  (Philad.  v.). 

Ignatius  is  quite  sure  that  the  Apostles  themselves 
instituted  this  episcopal  office.  In  view  of  the  silence 
of  the  New  Testament  this  confidence  is  very  striking. 
We  are  inclined  to  infer,  as  we  have  already  seen,  that  the 
"  monarchical "  episcopate  of  James  at  Jerusalem,  and  the 
''angels  of  the  churches"  in  Asia  Minor,  represent  the 
practice  of  the  Twelve  Apostles,  with  which  Ignatius 
was  familiar,  and  that  the  Pauline  method  of  elders 
and  deacons  without  a  president  was  peculiar  to  his 
churches,  and  perhaps  only  transitional,  attaching  to 
the  period  when  he  was  in  active  control  of  all  his 
churches.  At  any  rate,  the  eager  and  confident  attitude 
of  Ignatius,  on  the  subject  of  a  single  minister  presiding 
over  the  local  church,  shows  that  the  practice  which 
has  prevailed  all  through  Christendom  is  carried  back, 
if  not  to  the  time  of  the  Apostles,  at  any  rate  to  that 
which  immediately  succeeded.  There  is  an  august  simile ; 
the  local  church  is  compared  to  the  heavenly  court ; 
"  The  bishop  presiding  after  the  likeness  of  God,  and 
the  presbyters  after  the  likeness  of  the  council  of  the 
apostles,  with  the  deacons  also  who  are  most  dear 
to  me,  having  been  entrusted  with  the  diaconate  of 
Jesus  Christ"  (Magn.  vi.). 

The  Ignatian  bishop  exactly  corresponds  to  the  pastor 
of  a  Congregational  Church  in  England  or  in  America. 
And  that  is  the  direction  in  which  we  may  most  hopefully 
seek  to  illustrate  the  state  of  the  church  in  the  time 
of  Ignatius.     In  each  place  there  is  one  church.     He 


9o  THE    EARLY    CHURCH 

would  not,  like  modern  Congregationalists,  allow  several 
churches  in  a  single  city.  He,  like  St.  Paul,  and  the 
New  Testament  generally,  speaks  of  "the  church 
which  is  in  Ephesus"  or  "in  Magnesia,"  but  he  would 
never  have  said  "  the  churches  of  Ephesus."  Each  city 
had  its  one  organised  community,  with  the  bishop 
at  the  head  of  it,  and  its  due  complement  of  elders 
and  deacons.  Ignatius  is  the  earliest  writer  to  use 
the  phrase  which  acquired  so  amazing  a  power,  "the 
Catholic  Church " ;  but  he  means  by  it  not  what  it 
afterwards  came  to  mean,  but  the  sum  total  of  the 
local  communities  held  together  by  mutual  intercourse 
and  acts  of  sympathy.  The  bishop  does  not  preside 
over  several  churches,  but  only  over  one ;  we  do  not 
even  hear  yet  of  synods  of  bishops  from  neighbouring 
towns.  The  church  is  itself  the  sovereign  authority, 
which  appoints  its  own  representatives.  The  authority, 
however,  of  bishop  and  presbyters,  when  once  appointed, 
was  indefeasible.  Obedience  to  them  must  be  rendered 
"as  to  the  apostles  of  Jesus  Christ  our  hope "  (Trail,  ii.), 
so  that  in  the  view  of  Ignatius  the  presbytery  was 
virtually  the  successor  of  the  Apostles,  the  presbytery, 
that  is,  of  the  local  church. 

But  the  bishop  of  the  church  has  no  sacerdotal 
functions,  nor  does  he  exercise  his  authority,  otherwise 
than  through  his  moral  and  spiritual  qualities.  As  Mr. 
Durell  puts  it :  "  We  may  best  sum  up  his  position  by 
saying  that  he  is  to  be  the  elder  brother  in  the  brother- 
hood of  the  church."1 

The  testimony  of  Polycarp,  the  younger  contemporary 

1   "The  Historic  Church,"  p.  55. 


DEVELOPMENT  91 

of  Ignatius,  to  whom  Ignatius  wrote  one  of  his  extant 
letters,  entirely  accords  with  the  picture  of  the  churches 
given  by  the  elder  man,  except  that  Polycarp  never  refers 
to  the  bishop.  He  directs  his  letters  as  "  from  Polycarp 
and  the  presbyters  that  are  with  him  "  (Phil,  inscrip. 
i.  5,  6),  implying  that  he  regarded  himself  as  a  fellow- 
presbyter.  It  seemed  to  be  Ignatius'  peculiar  mission 
to  magnify  the  office  of  the  president,  or  bishop,  of  the 
presbytery,  but  apparently  his  ardent  and  exalted  view 
of  the  position  was  not  shared  by  his  contemporaries. 
Polycarp  fits  in  with  the  Pastoral  Epistles  much  more 
exactly  than  Ignatius  does. 

In  his  "  Epistle  to  the  Philippians"  we  see  "the  widows" 
as  in  I.  Tim.  v.  9,  an  order  of  deaconesses,  who  must  be 
"  soberminded  as  touching  the  faith  of  the  Lord,  making 
intercession  without  ceasing  for  all  men,  abstaining  from 
all  calumny,  evil  speaking,  false  witness,  love  of  money, 
and  every  evil  thing,  knowing  that  they  are  God's  altar, 
and  that  all  sacrifices  are  carefully  inspected,  and  that 
nothing  escapeth  Him  either  of  their  thoughts  or  intents, 
or  any  of  the  secret  things  of  the  heart"  (Phil.  iv.). 
Nothing  could  illustrate  better  the  unsacerdotal  char- 
acter of  the  church  in  the  middle  of  the  second  century 
than  this  analogy.  The  altar  in  the  church  is  the  heart 
of  the  people,  here  of  the  widows,  and  the  offering  is  the 
holy  life  which  is  acceptable  to  God.  Polycarp's  quali- 
fications for  the  presbyter  are  very  similar  to  those  for 
the  presbyter  or  bishop  in  the  Pastorals ;  and  so  with 
the  qualifications  for  the  deacons.  The  similarity  is  the 
more  interesting  because  the  words  and  phrases  are 
not,  with  one  exception,  those  of  the  New  Testament. 


92  THE    EARLY    CHURCH 

Polycarp's  presbyters  must  be  "compassionate,  merciful, 
attending  to  all  the  weak,  converting  the  wanderers, 
abstaining  from  all  wrath,  from  respect  of  persons,  and 
false  judgment,  not  readily  believing  anything  against 
any  one,  not  precipitate  in  judgment,  far  from  all  love  of 
money."  And  so  the  deacons  must  be  "  blameless,  not 
slanderers,  not  doubletongued  (I.  Tim.  iii.  8),  not  lovers 
of  money,  self-controlled  in  everything,  compassionate, 
careful,  walking  according  to  the  truth." 

The  qualifications  for  office,  as  in  the  New  Testament, 
are  moral.  The  authority  to  be  exercised  rests  on  this 
ethical  basis.  But  it  is  evident  that  between  the  time 
of  Paul  and  that  of  Polycarp,  the  presbyters  had  become 
more  judicial.  Their  teaching  function  had  receded, 
their  governing  function  had  advanced. 

In  the  Martyrdom  of  Polycarp^  a  letter  written  from 
the  church  in  Smyrna  describing  the  death  of  their 
leader,  about  a.d.  155  or  156,  Polycarp  is  called  "  bishop." 
The  "  Catholic  Church  "  is  mentioned  three  times  in  the 
same  sense  as  in  Ignatius ;  meaning  the  one  universal 
church  composed  of  all  the  local  churches. 

§  4.  We  turn  now  to  the  remaining  pieces  of  the  slender 
sub-apostolic  literature,  the  "  Epistle  of  Barnabas,"  the 
"  Epistle  to  Diognetus,"  and  the  "  Shepherd  of  Hermas." 

First,  the  "  Epistle  of  Barnabas."  This  not  very  edify- 
ing production  is  dated  in  the  third  decade  of  the  second 
century.  Of  the  New  Testament  books  it  bears  the 
nearest  resemblance  to  Hebrews ;  for  its  central  thought 
is  that  the  church  is  the  new  Israel.  The  church  is  the 
Promised  Land;  the  promises  made  to  the  Jews  are 
transferred  to  the  Christians.     The  church  is  the  vessel 


DEVELOPMENT  93 

of  the  Spirit.  But  while  the  church  is  thus  realised  in 
its  unity  (e.g.  vii.  §11)  the  only  organisation  is  that  of 
the  local  church.  No  early  writer  shows  more  clearly 
the  connection  between  the  "  ecclesia,"  or  synagogue, 
of  the  old  order  and  the  "ecclesia"  or  church  of  the 
new.  He  quotes  the  Psalms  (xlii.  3,  xxii.  23,  LXX) : 
11 1  will  make  confession  unto  thee  in  an  ecclesia  of  my 
brethren  and  I  will  sing  unto  thee  in  the  midst  of  an 
ecclesia  of  saints,"  as  if  the  word  church  were  still  fluid, 
and  meant  only  an  assembly  of  persons.  If  he  were 
asked  what  persons  formed  the  assemblies  which  took 
the  name  of  Christ,  he  would  answer,  they  who  have 
received  Jesus  as  the  scapegoat  for  their  sins.  And  if 
we  asked,  what  is  the  characteristic  of  the  assemblies, 
he  would  say.  brotherhood.  That  was  the  essence  of 
the  church  in  his  eyes.  He  makes  no  reference  to 
the  ministers  of  the  church  at  all,  though  he  implies 
that  there  were  "  teachers,"  in  his  modest  disclaimer  of 
being  one  :  "  I,  not  as  a  teacher,  but  as  one  of  your- 
selves will  sketch  a  few  truths  through  which  you  will 
rejoice  in  the  present  world  "  (chap.  i.  §  8). 

The  general  resemblance  to  the  teaching  of  Hebrews 
has  given  rise  to  the  supposition  that  Barnabas  was  the 
author  of  Hebrews.  But  nothing  can  be  clearer  than 
this,  that  the  author  of  this  insipid  and  childish  com- 
position was  not  the  writer  of  the  most  eloquent  book 
in  the  New  Testament.  If  Barnabas  wrote  Hebreivs,  the 
"  Epistle  of  Barnabas  "  is  an  apocryphal  imitation  of  that 
writer  by  a  very  inferior  hand.  But  valueless  as  the 
book  is  doctrinally,  and  far  removed  as  it  is  from  the 
splendid  vision  which  showed  us  "the  general  assembly 


94  THE    EARLY    CHURCH 

and  church  of  the  firstborn  who  are  written  in  heaven," 
the  document  has  its  value  in  showing  how  completely 
free  from  sacerdotalism  and  even  clericalism  the  church 
was  in  a.d.  130.  It  was  a  brotherhood  still,  as  in  the 
New  Testament. 

Second,  the  "Epistle  to  Diognetus."  This  really 
beautiful  composition  is  usually  dated  a  decade  earlier 
than  Barnabas.  It  is  a  noble  statement  of  Christianity 
at  its  birth ;  it  makes  clear  what  was  of  the  essence  of 
the  new  religion.  The  church  as  it  appears  here,  we 
may  assume,  possesses  all  the  notes  of  the  church  as  it 
came  from  Christ  and  the  first  Apostles.  The  author  finds 
Diognetus  interested  in  Christianity  and  endeavours 
to  set  forth,  "What  God  the  Christians  trust  and  how 
by  serving  Him  they  scorn  the  world  and  despise  death, 
escaping  the  polytheism  of  the  Greeks  and  the  super- 
stition of  the  Jews;  their  tender  love  for  one  another; 
and  why  they  have  appeared  now  and  not  earlier." 

Christians,  he  says,  are  not  distinguished  from  the 
rest  of  men  by  locality  or  speech  or  customs.  But 
living  indifferently  in  all  countries  and  states  they  present 
"the  constitution  of  their  own  State,  marvellous  and 
confessedly  paradoxical."  The  church  is  a  spiritual  state 
pervading  all  earthly  countries.  The  citizens  of  that 
invisible  country  are  in  the  earthly  states  as  strangers; 
every  foreign  country  is  their  home,  every  home  is 
foreign.  Their  morals  alone  distinguish  them  from  the 
rest  of  the  world  :  "  They  marry  and  bear  children  as 
others  do,  but  they  do  not  expose  their  offspring.  They 
have  a  common  table,  but  not  a  common  bed.  In  the 
flesh,  they  do  not  live  after  the  flesh.     Their  life  is  on 


DEVELOPMENT  95 

earth  but  their  conversation  in  heaven.  They  obey 
the  laws,  but  by  their  lives  rise  above  them.  They  love 
all,  and  all  persecute  them.  They  are  ignored  and 
condemned;  they  are  put  to  death,  and  made  alive. 
They  are  poor  and  make  many  rich ;  they  are  short  of 
all  things,  but  abound  in  everything.  They  are  dis- 
honoured, but  glorified  in  their  dishonour;  they  are 
blasphemed,  and  yet  vindicated.  They  are  reviled,  and 
bless ;  outraged,  and  honour.  Doing  good  they  are 
punished  as  bad ;  punished,  they  rejoice  as  being  made 
alive.  .  .  .  To  put  it  in  a  word,  what  the  soul  is  in 
the  body,  Christians  are  in  the  world."  All  this  breathes 
the  spirit  of  the  New  Testament.  That  the  church  is 
the  soul  of  the  world,  is  an  idea  which  seems  caught 
from  Jesus  Himself.  As  the  soul  dwells  in  the  body 
but  is  not  of  the  body,  Christians  are  in  the  world  but 
not  of  the  world.  Themselves  seen  in  the  world,  their 
piety  is  unseen.  Evidently  at  this  time  the  church, 
simple,  humble,  holy  and  unostentatious,  was  growing 
rapidly  (chap.  vi.  §  9).  Christians  are  the  depositories  of 
the  heavenly  truth,  the  truth  of  the  Incarnate  Son,  the 
Maker  of  earth  and  sea. 

Who  knew  what  God  was  before  He  came?  Now 
we  know  the  Father  through  the  Son — the  nourisher, 
father,  teacher,  counsellor,  physician,  mind,  light,  honour, 
glory,  strength,  and  life,  that  sets  us  free  from  care  about 
earthly  things.  The  first  thing  is  to  know  Him,  the  next 
to  be  like  Him. 

The  author  does  not  make  it  very  clear  why  the  revela- 
tion came  only  late  in  time,  but  he  leaves  us  in  no  doubt 
what  the  revelation  was,  or  what  effect  it  produces.     It 


96  THE    EARLY    CHURCH 

is  the  revelation  of  God  our  Saviour,  and  the  result  is  a 
community  of  those  who  believe  in  Him  and  are  there- 
fore in  the  world  to  save  it.  He  writes  as  a  learner  from 
the  Apostles  and  therefore  a  teacher  of  the  nations. 
11  The  tradition  of  the  Apostles  is  kept,  and  the  grace  of 
the  church  exults."  The  tree  of  life  and  knowledge  is 
in  the  church,  a  paradise  restored.  But  it  is  the  love  rather 
than  the  knowledge  which  is  to  be  desired,  for  (quoting 
from  Paul)  "knowledge  puffeth  up,  but  love  edineth." 
The  closing  words  of  the  epistle  are  very  obscure,  but  if 
the  text  is  correct  they  may  give  a  picture  of  the  church 
in  her  ministry  and  worship  :  "  Salvation  is  shown,  and 
apostles  are  made  wise,  and  the  passover  of  the  Lord 
advances,  the  choirs  assemble  and  are  harmonised  in 
order.  And  teaching  the  saints  the  word  rejoices,  through 
which  the  Father  is  glorified,  to  whom  be  glory  for 
ever.     Amen." 

Again  we  have  the  noteworthy  fact  that  the  truth  of 
the  Gospel  is  presented,  an  apology  for  the  church  is 
offered,  without  any  reference  to  clergy,  or  sacraments, 
or  what  are  now  called  ecclesiastical  practices.  Every- 
thing is  moral  and  spiritual  only,  as  in  the  New  Testament. 

Third,  the  "  Shepherd  of  Hermas."  This  mystical  writ- 
ing which  had  an  extraordinary  vogue  in  early  times,  but 
seems  now  frigid  and  lifeless  enough,  was,  according  to 
the  Muratorian  Fragment  written  by  Hermas,  "While  his 
brother  Pius,  the  bishop,  was  sitting  in  the  chair  of  the 
church  of  the  city  of  Rome."  With  all  its  extravagances 
and  insipidities,  therefore,  it  may  yet  show  us  what  the 
Roman  church  was  in  the  middle  of  the  second  century. 
The    ministry  is    still   in   the    stage  in  which  the  first 


DEVELOPMENT  97 

century  left  it.  The  church  is  not  built  on  Peter,  but 
on  another  rock,  viz.  Christ  Himself,  "As  it  were  of  a 
single  stone  being  fitted  together  in  one.  And  the  stone- 
work appeared  as  if  hewn  out  of  the  rock,  for  it  seemed 
to  me  to  be  all  a  single  stone."  Thus  the  "  Shepherd  " 
follows  Peter's  Epistle,  and  does  not  sanction  the  later 
Roman  dogma. 

Only  through  the  incarnate  Christ  can  entrance  into 
the  living  spiritual  church  be  obtained.  The  holiness  of 
the  church  is  not  transcendental  but  moral.  They  can 
dwell  in  the  church,  and  they  only,  who  have  faith,  con- 
tinence, simplicity,  guilelessness,  reverence,  knowledge, 
and  love.  The  catholicity  of  the  church  consists  in  it 
containing  all  nations.  The  unity  is  made  by  the  oneness 
in  Christ.  But  the  unity  is  ideal  only,  a  goal  to  be  ulti- 
mately reached.  There  is  no  thought  of  forestalling  that 
final  result  by  constructing  a  papal  autocracy.  Mean- 
while Hermas,  like  all  the  sub-apostolic  writers,  knows  of 
no  organisation  except  that  of  the  local  church.  In  the 
Roman  church,  to  whom  he  addresses  his  words,  there 
were  schisms,  which  he  tries  to  heal.  tl  Pope  Pius  I." 
no  more  produced  unity  in  the  local  church  of  Rome 
than  Pope  Pius  X.  produces  unity  in  Christendom  to-day. 
"  Look  ye,  children,  lest  these  divisions  of  yours  deprive 
you  of  your  life." 

Hermas  is  ascetic.  The  rich  cannot  enter  the  church 
unless  they  part  with  their  riches.  He  favours  the 
primitive  communism.  Entrance  into  the  church  is 
by  baptism,  and  there  seems  to  be  no  remission  for 
post-baptismal  sin.  He  is  more  eager  to  cast  the  wicked 
out  of  the  church,  and  so  to  secure  its  purity,  than  to 

G 


98  THE    EARLY    CHURCH 

save  the  individual  sinners.  He  has  the  quaint  idea 
that  the  Apostles  descended  into  the  place  of  departed 
spirits  to  administer  baptism  to  the  righteous.  He 
leaves  room  for  repentance  in  the  world  beyond  death. 
He  recommends  fasting,  but  is  afraid  lest  the  pre- 
scribed fasts  should  be  unreal  and  formal. 

The  ministry,  as  has  been  said,  is  still  that  of  the 
New  Testament,  viz.  "the  apostles  and  bishops  and 
teachers  and  deacons,  who  walked  after  the  holiness 
of  God,  and  exercised  their  office  of  bishop  and  teacher 
and  deacon  in  purity  and  sanctity  for  the  elect  of 
God,  some  of  them  already  fallen  on  sleep  and  others 
still  living"  (Vis.  iii.  5).  He  evidently  thinks  of  the 
first  Apostles  as  a  permanent  element  in  the  manage- 
ment of  the  church,  perhaps  by  their  writings  or  by 
the  tradition  which  had  come  down  from  them.  The 
deacons  in  the  Roman  church  had  the  charge  of 
widows  and  orphans ;  they  had  apparently  abused  their 
office  to  enrich  themselves.  The  bishops  are  still  the 
elders,  "hospitable  persons  who  gladly  received  into 
their  houses  at  all  times  the  servants  of  God  without 
hypocrisy"  (see  Tit.  i.  7).  Though  Hernias  refers  to 
Clement  (Vis.  ii.  4),  who  was  presumably  the  head  of 
the  Roman  church,  he  does  not  call  him  bishop.  The 
president  of  the  elders  or  bishops  had  not  yet  received 
the  distinctive  name  of  bishop  which  separated  him 
from  his  fellow-elders. 

Whether  the  teachers  are  the  elders  we  cannot  de- 
termine. But  it  is  most  interesting  to  find  the  prophet, 
as  in  the  Didache  and  as  in  the  New  Testament,  still 
a  living  power  in  the  church  of  Rome,  not  an  ordained 


DEVELOPMENT  99 

officer,  but  a  man  filled  with  the  Spirit.  "When  the 
man  who  hath  the  Divine  Spirit  cometh  into  a  syna- 
gogue (this  name  was  still  used  for  a  church,  as  in 
James)  of  righteous  men,  who  have  faith  in  a  Divine 
Spirit,  and  intercession  is  made  to  God  by  the  syna- 
gogue of  those  men,  then  the  angel  of  the  prophetic 
spirit  lying  close  to  him  fills  the  man,  and  the  man 
filled  with  the  Holy  Spirit  speaks  to  the  congregation 
as  the  Lord  wills"  (Mand.  xi.  9).  This  thoroughly 
New  Testament  picture  is  supplemented  by  the  equally 
New  Testament  thought  that  "the  man  who  has  the 
Lord  in  his  heart  is  able  to  master  all  things  and  all 
these  commandments  "  (Mand.  xii.  3). 

Mr.  Durell  discredits  the  testimony  of  the  Muratorian 
fragment,  which  places  the  "  Shepherd  "  in  the  middle  of 
the  second  century,  because  the  ministry  is  so  little 
developed.  He  refers  it  rather  to  the  same  period 
as  Cfemetit.  Unable  to  determine  the  point,  we 
can  at  any  rate  see  that  still,  in  the  second  century, 
the  free  spiritual  worship,  which  appears  in  Paul's 
Epistles,  was  maintained,  even  in  the  church  of  Rome ; 
the  ministry  was  still  incipient,  making  no  claim  to 
autocratic  rule.  The  bishop  in  the  monarchical  sense 
of  the  word  had  hardly  emerged,  or  at  least  had  not 
gained  a  distinctive  name. 

§  5.  From  our  review  of  the  sub-apostolic  writings  we 
get  the  following  results :  Broadly  speaking,  the  church, 
as  it  appears  in  the  New  Testament,  remains  unmodi- 
fied. There  is  no  sacerdotal  element,  no  sacramentarian 
tendency,  no  hierarchical  principle.  The  church  in 
an   ideal   and   spiritual   sense   is   one,  a   new  Israel,  a 


ioo  THE    EARLY    CHURCH 

leaven  permeating  the  earth,  like  a  soul  in  the  body, 
without  obliterating  racial  or  political  distinctions.  But 
the  organisation  is  only  that  of  the  local  communities. 
Everywhere  the  local  society  is  ordered  for  the  purpose 
of  worship  and  teaching  and  discipline,  for  the  mutual 
help  of  members,  and  for  the  extension  of  the  new 
religion  in  the  world.  Everywhere  the  constitution  of 
the  society  is  on  the  model  of  the  synagogue,  presby- 
terian.  There  are  always  elders  and  deacons  chosen 
by  the  community  to  manage  its  affairs,  to  arrange 
its  worship,  to  maintain  the  teaching  and  discipline. 
These  leaders  of  the  body  are  honoured,  and  in  some 
cases  supported,  by  the  members  of  the  church ;  but 
their  authority  invariably  rests  on  their  character  and 
service,  not  upon  supernatural  powTers  entrusted  to 
them. 

The  only  point  in  which  there  seems  to  be  an 
advance  on  the  New  Testament  organisation  is,  that  in 
some  places  the  president  of  the  elders  is  assuming  the 
distinctive  name  of  bishop.  Like  James  at  Jerusalem, 
or  the  "angels"  of  the  seven  churches  of  Asia,  the 
bishop  represents  the  congregation,  and  secures  its 
unity.  The  vehemence  with  which  Ignatius  defends 
the  arrangement  gives  us  the  impression  that  he  was  the 
inventor  of  it.  But  it  was  a  development  natural,  and 
perhaps  inevitable,  in  itself.  A  society  cannot  be  held 
together,  or  exercise  executive  power,  unless  it  can 
appoint  a  head,  a  president  or  monarch.  The  phrase 
11  monarchical  episcopate "  is  a  high-sounding  mode  of 
describing  this  very  natural  development ;  and  perhaps 
it  has  been  chosen  in  order  to  justify  the  monarchical 


DEVELOPMENT  101 

position  of  bishops  in  later  times,  when  a  bishop  ruled 
a  diocese,  or  a  province,  or  a  country,  or  as  episcopus 
episcoporu7n  the  whole  Christian  world ;  but  the  phrase 
may  be  kept  as  long  as  we  remember  that  it  only  means 
the  presidency  of  one  elder  in  the  board  of  elders  of 
a  local  church,  under  the  name  of  bishop.  Such  an 
officer  is  not  recognised,  or  at  least  not  named,  in  the 
New  Testament.  The  one  distinctive  contribution  of 
the  sub-apostolic  period  was  to  recognise  him,  call  him 
bishop,  and  make  him  the  essential  centre  and  unifying 
principle  of  each  church. 

One  further  point  emerges,  which  could  not  very  well 
appear  in  the  New  Testament  itself;  in  these  writings 
we  see  the  influence  of  the  New  Testament  as  an 
authority.  The  quotations  or  references  are  very 
numerous.  We  can  therefore  see  the  early  stages  of 
the  process  by  which  in  the  second  half  of  the  second 
century  the  apostolic  writings  became  the  standard  of 
doctrine.  In  the  anti-Montanist  movement  the  prin- 
ciple was  already  secure  :  "  For  one  who  has  deter- 
mined to  order  his  life  in  accordance  with  the  Gospel 
may  neither  add  to  nor  subtract  from  this  doctrine." 
By  the  end  of  the  second  century  Irenaeus  can  say : 
"  Since,  therefore,  the  tradition  from  the  Apostles  is 
thus  held  in  the  church  and  endures  among  us,  let  us 
turn  to  that  scriptural  proof  provided  by  those  Apostles 
who  also  wrote  the  Gospel."  The  scriptures  were  read 
in  the  assemblies  of  the  church.  In  the  canons  of 
Hippolytus  at  the  end  of  the  century  we  find  an  order 
of  readers  mentioned ;  and  Justin  Martyr  gives  us  a 
glimpse   of  the  worship   of  the  church  in    the  words : 


THE    EARLY    CHURCH 


"The  memoirs  of  the  Apostles  or  the  writings  of  the 
prophets  are  read  as  long  as  time  permits,  and  when 
the  reader  has  ceased  the  president  verbally  instructs 
and  exhorts  to  the  imitation  of  these  good  things" 
(Justin  Martyr,  Apol.  i.  67). 

The  extraordinary  superiority  of  the  New  Testament 
to  the  sub-apostolic  fathers,  and  to  the  first  group  of 
great  church  writers,  Justin  Martyr,  Irenaeus,  Tertullian, 
and  Clement  of  Alexandria,  contributed  to  this  pre- 
eminence of  Scripture.  But  in  the  first  instance  the 
New  Testament  won  its  authority,  not  from  its  intrinsic 
value,  but  from  the  belief  that  it  contained  the  witness 
of  the  Apostles ;  it  was  the  way  by  which  the  Apostles, 
and  the  apostolic  office,  continued  to  exist  in  the 
church  for  all  time.  The  apostolic  church  was  the 
church  which  rested  on  the  testimony  of  the  apostolic 
writings. 

The  sub-apostolic  writers  cover,  roughly  speaking, 
the  first  half  of  the  second  century.  The  Apologists, 
Aristides,  Justin  Martyr,  begin  the  second  half,  and  the 
more  voluminous  writers  appear  at  the  end  of  the 
century ;  and  with  them  many  great  and  important 
changes  appear  in  the  constitution  and  the  theory  of 
the  church.  But  for  a  whole  century  after  the  death 
of  St.  Paul,  the  church  continued  to  be  very  much 
what  it  is  in  the  Pauline  writings.  When  we  study  the 
New  Testament,  to  understand  what  the  church  was  at 
the  beginning,  we  may  be  assured  that  we  see  there  the 
church  as  it  was,  and  as  it  wrought,  and  as  it  spread, 
for  a  whole  century.  The  changes  which  came  later 
begin  to  show  themselves  after  that  century,  but  during 


DEVELOPMENT  103 

the  century  there  were  only  the  slightest  adumbrations 
of  them.  The  church  of  the  New  Testament  is  not, 
therefore,  as  it  might  seem  at  the  first  careless  glance, 
the  nascent  institution  of  the  lifetime  of  the  first 
Apostles,  an  infant  which  necessarily  laid  aside  its 
childish  things  when  it  began  to  feel  its  feet.  To 
regard  the  New  Testament  in  that  light  is  greatly  to 
underestimate  its  value  and  authority  for  fixing  the 
standard  and  the  essential  principles  of  the  new  society. 
The  church  of  the  New  Testament  is  that  organisation 
and  mode  of  religious  life  which  for  a  hundred  years 
drove  the  roots  of  Christianity  into  the  world,  and 
extended  the  kingdom  of  Christ  with  amazing  rapidity 
and  effect.  To  find  out,  therefore,  its  essential  principles, 
its  driving  power,  and  its  method  of  extension,  would  be 
to  discover  how  the  church  in  all  ages  may  extend  and 
do  her  work.  We  are  not  yet  called  upon  to  note  how 
the  church  of  the  New  Testament  developed  into  the 
historic  church,  how  Christianity  became  Catholicism; 
we  need  not  for  the  moment  determine  whether  that 
development  has  been  a  legitimate  growth,  or  a  process 
of  perversion  and  corruption.  But  we  are  concerned, 
confining  ourselves  to  the  New  Testament  as  we  see  it 
in  the  light  of  the  half  century  which  follows,  to  dis- 
cover the  essential  principles,  the  permanent  forces  of 
the  church  in  this  its  earliest  and  purest  state. 

If  we  can  succeed  in  distinctly  conceiving  this  church 
which  existed  and  worked  for  the  first  hundred  years 
after  the  Apostles,  we  shall  have  a  standard  by  which 
we  can  for  all  time  test  and  correct  subsequent  develop- 
ments.    We  may  with  confidence  assert  that  nothing 


io4  THE    EARLY    CHURCH 

can  be  of  the  essence  of  the  church  which  is  not 
clearly  depicted  in  the  New  Testament;  and  on  the 
other  hand,  what  is  essential  to  the  church  of  the 
New  Testament  must  be  essential  to  the  church  of 
all  time. 

The  investigation  is  by  no  means  so  easy  as  at  first 
sight  it  seems.  The  New  Testament  does  not  set  itself 
to  depict  and  define  the  church,  it  only  throws  many 
sidelights  upon  it.  It  must  always  remain  to  some 
extent  a  matter  of  opinion  which  things  are  essential 
and  which  are  not.  Those  who  approach  the  New  Testa- 
ment only  through  the  medium  of  the  church-creeds 
and  institutions,  which  are  presumably  derived  from  it, 
are  prone  to  think  that  all  the  development  is  germi- 
nally  present  in  the  first  age.  But  there  are  certain 
points  indisputably  clear,  and  on  these  we  may  dwell 
with  confidence  in  the  two  succeeding  chapters. 

The  emergence  and  trend  of  Catholicism  must  be 
considered  afterwards. 


CHAPTER   V 

THE   FIRST   NOTE   OF   THE    CHURCH 
OF   THE   NEW   TESTAMENT 

§  i.  The  rock  on  which  the  Church  was  built  was 
the  faith  in,  and  the  confession  of,  Jesus  Christ.  But 
the  faith  was  not  formal  or  nominal,  nor  was  the 
confession  that  of  the  lips.  It  was  a  faith  which  re- 
generated, and  effected  a  complete  conversion  of  life 
and  character.  Such  a  change  was  the  work  of  God, 
and  was  initiated  and  carried  out  by  His  Spirit.  The 
Spirit  was  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  they  who  were  born 
again  of  the  Spirit  were  holy.  The  working  of  the 
Spirit  was  to  produce  a  likeness  to  Jesus  Christ.  It 
was  as  if  Christ  were  born  in  the  heart  and  grew, 
attaining  the  fulness  of  stature  by  a  process  of  deepen- 
ing faith.  This  was  called  living  by  faith  in  the  Son  of 
God,  or  walking  in  the  Spirit,  indifferently.  Viewed  in 
its  intrinsic  nature  the  life  was  a  reproduction  of  the 
character  and  conduct  of  Christ ;  viewed  in  its  causation 
it  was  due  to  the  operation  of  the  Holy  Spirit. 

Now  Jesus  Christ  was  above  all  things  the  Master, 
and  the  embodiment,  of  a  new  morality.  It  was  a 
morality  which  assimilated  man  to  God ;  it  was  different 

io5 


106  THE    EARLY    CHURCH 

from  all  morality  previously  known  in  its  content  and  in 
its  motive  and  in  its  sanction.  As  we  study  the  life 
of  Jesus  in  the  Gospel  narratives,  the  fact  is  borne  in 
upon  us  from  every  episode.  In  Him  goodness  ceases 
to  be  negative,  the  mere  abstinence  from  evil,  and 
becomes  positive,  an  active  resolute  course  of  com- 
munion with  God  and  beneficence  to  men ;  in  Him  all 
personal  and  prudential  motives  disappear;  He  seeks 
not  His  own,  but  carries  out  the  will  of  God  for  the  love 
of  it,  lives  for  the  kingship  of  God,  and  seeks  to  bless 
men  as  if  that  were  the  one  object  of  existence.  In  Him 
the  sanction  of  right  conduct  is  not  utilitarian;  He  is 
neither  seeking  pleasure,  nor  anxious  to  avoid  pain ;  He 
is  not  driven  to  goodness  by  fear  or  the  threat  of 
punishment ;  the  sole  sanction  lies  in  a  perfect  harmony 
with  the  will  of  God;  He  identifies  his  own  will  with 
God's,  and  desires  only  to  be  well  pleasing  to  Him  for 
its  own  sake.  This  was  a  new  morality ;  not  that  the 
old  precepts  of  goodness  were  necessarily  altered,  nor 
that  new  ideas  of  goodness  took  their  place,  but  a  new 
conception  of  what  man  should  be  was  quietly  intro- 
duced, a  new  motive  was  suggested,  and  above  all  the 
previous  false  or  inadequate  sanctions  were  removed, 
and  an  all-inclusive  sanction,  the  will  of  the  wise  and 
holy  God  who  is  Love,  was  established. 

This  morality  of  Jesus  was  the  first  note  of  the 
church.  The  church  was  composed  of  those  who 
had  believed  in  Him,  were  regenerated  by  Him,  and 
by  the  indwelling  of  the  Holy  Spirit  were  growing 
like  Him. 

In   the    earliest  apologies   addressed  to   Hadrian  or 


FIRST    NOTE    OF    THE    CHURCH      107 

M.  Aurelius,  the  Christian  apologists  unhesitatingly 
occupy  this  ground ;  they  point  confidently  to  the 
new  lives,  the  pure  characters,  which  are  the  result 
of  faith.1  Christians  are  epistles  known  and  read  of 
all  men;  they  convey  the  doctrine  of  Christ  through 
the  regenerate  and  Christlike  life.  The  testimony 
does  not  lie  so  much  in  the  change  from  former  vileness 
to  a  relative  goodness,  as  in  the  positive  type  of  nobility, 
purity,  and  trustworthiness,  which  shines  like  a  star 
in  the  moral  twilight  of  the  world.  Christians  were 
a  light  shining  in  a  dark  place;  they  held  out  the 
truth,  and  attracted  men  to  it  by  the  love  of  it. 

The  constituents  of  the  new  goodness  are  clearly 
presented  in  the  New  Testament.  But  they  do  not 
strike  the  modern  reader,  because  now,  thanks  to 
the  New  Testament,  the  Christian  ideal  is  taken  for 
granted,  and  its  startling  contrast  to  other  standards 
is  toned  down.  It  is  well,  therefore,  to  emphasise 
the  salient  features  of  the  character  which  was  taking 
possession  of  the  world,  viz.  truth,  purity,  and 
indifference  to  worldly  possessions. 

The  new  conception  of  truth  is  brought  out  in 
the  story  of  Ananias  and  Sapphira.  The  event  made 
an   indelible   impression    on   the   early   church.     Here 

1  Harnackin  "The  Expansion  of  Christianity,"  i.  p.  260,  sums  up 
this  teaching  of  the  Apologists,  Aristides,  Justin,  Tertullian.  One 
extract  from  Justin  may  suffice:  "There  is  a  distinction  between 
death  and  death.  For  this  reason  the  disciples  of  Christ  die  daily, 
torturing  their  desires  and  mortifying  them  according  to  the  divine 
scriptures  ;  for  we  have  no  part  at  all  in  shameless  desires,  or  scenes 
impure,  or  glances  lewd,  or  ears  attentive  to  evil,  lest  our  souls 
thereby  be  wounded." — Apol.  xxvi. 


io8  THE    EARLY    CHURCH 

was  a  lie  which  to  antiquity  would  not  have  seemed 
a  lie  at  all ;  in  the  holy  enthusiasm  of  the  new  faith 
the  members  of  the  community  were  selling  their 
goods  and  bringing  the  proceeds  into  a  common  stock. 
These  two  held  back  a  part  of  the  price ;  they  wished 
to  contribute  to  the  support  of  the  rest,  but  they 
hesitated  to  part  with  all  their  resources.  They  told 
the  church,  or  at  least  they  implied,  that  they  were 
giving  all.  This  "  economy  of  truth,"  or  "reservation," 
as  the  Jesuit  moralists  would  call  it,  was  immediately 
visited  with  condign  punishment.  The  reserve  was 
treated  as  a  lie  against  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  the  penalty 
was  death.  Into  the  new  society  of  the  church,  as 
into  the  heavenly  city,  there  could  by  no  means  enter 
anything  which  maketh  a  lie.  Christ  was  the  Truth, 
and  it  became  at  once  the  necessity  for  Christians 
to  lie  not  one  to  another,  but  to  speak  the  truth  in 
love. 

Considering  the  proneness  of  human  nature  to  deceit 
and  equivocation,  and  remembering  how  careless  of 
truth  men  still  are,  we  can  only  regard  this  demand 
of  absolute  transparency,  and  open  candour  of  speech 
and  action,  as  the  dawn  of  a  new  era.  Christians  were 
people  who  would  not  lie;  when  persecution  began 
they  could  save  their  lives  by  a  few  words  of  com- 
pliance, by  placing  a  little  incense  on  the  emperor's 
brasier,  by  a  trifling  concealment  of  their  inner  faith. 
But  without  hesitation  they  refused  compliance,  and 
preferred  torture  and  death. 

Men  are  not  naturally  truthful ;  in  many  parts  of  the 
world   deceit   is    counted    cleverness ;    and    purism    in 


FIRST    NOTE    OF    THE    CHURCH      109 

language  is  hardly  recognised  as  an  ideal.  But  the  church 
at  the  beginning,  founded  on  the  truth,  made  truth  a 
foundation  virtue.  Difficult  as  it  was  even  for  a 
regenerate  character  to  be  absolutely  truthful,  the  ideal 
was  no  more  doubtful ;  the  conscience  was  enlightened ; 
and  it  was  forthwith  an  obligation  to  tell  the  truth, 
without  equivocation  or  reserve,  in  scorn  of  conse- 
quences, to  count  death  itself  preferable  to  the  lie 
in  the  soul  which  draws  a  veil  between  a  man  and 
his  God. 

But  more  radical  than  the  new  doctrine  of  truth  was 
the  new  doctrine  of  purity.  In  the  world,  into  the 
midst  of  which  the  church  was  born,  fornication  was 
not  condemned.  Adultery  was  wrong  because  it  robbed 
a  man  of  his  rights  in  his  wife ;  but  a  man's  infidelity 
was  permitted.  The  indulgence  of  passion  was  regarded 
as  natural ;  concupiscence  was  an  appetite,  not  to  be 
restrained  more  than  the  appetite  for  food;  the  common 
conscience  did  not  reprove  the  results  which  followed 
from  the  laxity.  When  passion  is  unrestrained,  it  quickly 
falls  a  victim  to  satiety,  and  then,  not  able  to  draw 
off,  it  can  only  seek  gratification  in  unnatural  forms. 
The  ancient  world,  like  the  Mohammedan  world  of 
to-day,  and  like  the  unchristian  part  of  Christendom, 
was  falling  a  prey  to  its  own  indulgence  of  vice. 

Christ  changed  the  whole  idea  and  practice  of  those 
who  believed  in  Him.  The  body  was  at  once  recog- 
nised as  the  temple  of  God ;  its  appetites  must  be 
regulated  with  a  view  to  the  indwelling  divinity.  Not 
only  were  unnatural  vices  impossible,  but  the  loose 
connections,  concubinage,  or  fornication,  were  abhorrent. 


THE    EARLY    CHURCH 


The  relation  of  man  and  wife  was  alone  permitted,  and 
that  was  sanctified  by  the  exalted  and  mystical  figure ; 
it  was  regarded  as  a  symbol  of  the  union  between  Christ 
and  the  church.  The  Christian  community  began  to 
practise  a  chastity  which  before  had  been  not  only 
unrealised,  but  inconceivable.  The  conjugal  tie,  not 
only  inviolate  but  sanctified  and  brought  into  the  light 
of  eternity,  made  possible  a  new  conception  of  home, 
gave  a  sanctity  to  children,  and  opened  up  a  new  future 
for  the  human  race.  Infanticide,  the  unquestioned 
practice  of  antiquity,  was  impossible;  for  the  offspring 
of  the  Christian  was  regarded  as  from  the  first  holy.1 

Equally  important  was  the  view  which  the  new  good- 
ness took  of  material  goods.  Jesus  had  by  His  example 
and  precept  discredited  what  He  called  Mammon.  He 
directed  men's  minds  away  from  earthly  possessions, 
evanescent  and  unsatisfying,  to  the  wealth  of  the  spirit, 
the  heavenly  relation  of  love  and  service  and  help. 
Thus  in  the  community  based  on  Him,  silver  and  gold 
were  nothing  accounted  of.  To  have  food  and  raiment 
was  enough.  Superfluous  possessions  were  bestowed 
on  those  who  needed  them.     Another  of  the  significant 

1  Galen's  judgment  on  the  Christians,  quoted  by  Harnack  (loc.  cit. 
p.  267),  is  most  interesting  as  the  view  of  an  outsider:  "The 
people  who  are  called  Christians  .  .  .  their  contempt  of  death  is 
patent  to  us  all,  also  that  under  the  influence  of  a  certain  modesty 
they  shrink  from  an  indulgence  of  sexual  passion.  For  there  are 
among  them  both  men  and  women  who  all  their  lifetime  have 
abstained  from  sexual  intercourse  ;  there  are  also  those  who  in  the 
control  and  discipline  of  their  minds,  and  in  the  keenest  pursuit 
of  virtue,  have  gone  so  far  that  they  do  not  yield  to  the  truest 
philosophers/' 


FIRST    NOTE    OF    THE    CHURCH      in 

stories  of  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  was  treasured  up 
as  symbolic  for  the  Church.  Peter,  the  first  Christian, 
the  typical  leader  of  all  who  should  come  after,  says 
with  perfect  simplicity,  "Silver  and  gold  have  I  none, 
but  such  as  I  have  give  I  unto  thee.  In  the  name  of 
Jesus  Christ,  rise  and  walk."  The  name  of  Jesus,  and 
all  the  beneficent  powers  connected  with  it,  are  better 
than  silver  and  gold. 

Not  only  was  money  regarded  with  indifference;  it 
was  denounced  and  renounced  as  a  positive  evil.  The 
love  of  it  was  declared  to  be  the  root  of  all  kinds  of 
sin.  It  led  men  into  snares  which  destroyed  the  soul. 
It  grew  into  an  idol,  which  took  the  place  of  God.  As 
idolatry  was  gradually  overcome,  the  Church  recognised 
that  it  came  back  in  another  form  as  covetousness. 
And  thus  it  became  as  much  an  object  of  Christian 
life  to  beware  of  covetousness  as  to  keep  oneself  from 
idols. 

This,  then,  was  the  "  new  man,"  the  regenerate  char- 
acter, which  came  to  the  constitution  of  the  Church. 
We  are  looking  only  on  the  main  outlines,  the  love  of 
truth,  the  physical  purity,  and  the  indifference  to  riches. 
This  was  the  first,  the  most  essential,  the  most  inalien- 
able, note  of  the  church.  Christians  were  people 
whose  word  was  their  bond;  their  yes  and  no  were 
sufficient;  they  swore  not  at  all.  They  were  people 
who  lived  in  purity,  regarding  marriage  as  honourable, 
though  frequently  foregoing  even  that  permitted  joy, 
that  they  might  serve  God  better.  They  were  people 
who  seldom  possessed,  and  never  desired,  worldly 
goods ;  money  had  no  power  over  them ;  they  did  not 


THE    EARLY    CHURCH 


live  for  it,  rejoice  in  its  growth,  or  mourn  over  its 
departure.  Engaged  in  their  ordinary  occupations, 
working  to  provide  things  honest  in  the  sight  of  all, 
they  did  not  seek  to  lay  up  treasure ;  what  they  gained 
in  a  legitimate  way  they  shared  with  others. 

This  "  new  man  "  was  the  result  of  a  living  and  trans- 
forming faith  in  Jesus,  effected  by  the  Holy  Ghost 
within.  The  "old  man,"  the  natural  self,  the  mind 
of  the  flesh,  was  crucified  with  Christ ;  out  of  the 
grave  emerged  the  new  man,  to  live  the  new  life,  reborn. 
It  was  a  vital  spiritual  experience,  a  fact  which  no 
one  could  gainsay ;  a  city  set  upon  a  hill.  This  re- 
generate moral  nature,  produced  by  a  genuine  faith  in 
Christ,  the  first  and  by  far  the  most  important  note 
of  the  Church,  was  symbolised  by  the  initial  rite  of 
baptism.  The  Christian  who  believed  in  Christ,  when 
the  reality  of  his  faith  and  conversion  became  apparent, 
was  plunged  into  the  laver,  which  represented  the 
grave  of  Christ,  and  emerged  to  live  the  new  life. 
Thus  the  baptistery  was  called  "the  laver  of  regenera- 
tion." And  the  moral  and  spiritual  nature  of  the  rite, 
marking  it  off  for  ever  from  a  mere  outward  form  or  an 
opus  operatum,  was  preserved  by  calling  it  "enlighten- 
ing." The  baptized  were  the  "enlightened,"  for  the 
stress  was  laid  on  the  actual  fact  of  the  spiritual  change. 
They  were  born  of  water  and  the  Spirit,  not  of  water 
only.1 

1  Harnack  sums  up  the  church  of  these  early  days  thus  :  "  For 
over  a  century  and  a  half  it  ranked  everything  secondary  to  the 
task  of  maintaining  its  morality.  It  recognised  no  faith  and  no  for- 
giveness that  could  serve  as  a  pillow  for  the  conscience.  .  .  .    Her 


FIRST    NOTE    OF    THE    CHURCH      113 

It  is  a  painful  study  to  follow  the  degeneration  of 
baptism  in  the  history  of  the  church.  Gradually  the 
rite  of  baptism  came  to  be  regarded  as  a  magical  and 
supernatural  mode  of  regenerating.  By  the  beginning 
of  the  fourth  century,  Constantine  deferred  baptism 
till  the  approach  of  death,  in  the  superstition  that  the 
water  washed  the  sins  away.  But  this  reversal  of  the 
New  Testament  teaching  makes  it  the  more  salutary 
and  necessary  to  study  the  New  Testament  itself,  and 
to  realise  that  in  the  beginning  it  was  the  regenerate 
character  of  those  who  believed,  the  putting  away  of 
the  old  sins,  and  the  newness  of  life  in  Christ  Jesus, 
that  marked  the  church,  and  was  outwardly  symbolised 
by  baptism. 

§  2.  It  is  evident,  however,  that  the  fulness  of  the 
measure  of  the  stature  of  Christ  was  not  easily  or 
immediately  achieved.  Those  who  were  quickened  into 
new  life,  and  washed  from  their  old  sins,  did  not  reach 
perfection  at  a  leap.  Thus  the  church  presents  itself, 
not  as  the  city  in  the  heavens  secured  from  all  intru- 
sion of  evil,  but  as  a  school  of  goodness,  in  which  by 
teaching,  by  discipline,  by  example,  and  by  prayer,  the 
members  help  each  other  to  the  result  of  holiness. 

From  this  point  of  view  it  is  instructive  to  study 
the  letters  to  the  seven  churches  in  Revelatio7i,  and 
Paul's  letters  to  the  churches  which  he  was  directing. 
The  letters  to  the  seven  churches  are  discouraging,  for 

power  lay  in  the  splendid  and  stringent  code  of  her  baptismal 
training  ;  moreover,  every  brother  was  backed  up  and  assisted  in 
order  that  he  might  continue  to  be  fit  for  the  duties  he  had  under- 
taken to  fulfil." — Expansion  of  Christianity,  i.  488. 

H 


ii4  THE    EARLY    CHURCH 

the  admonitions  apparently  failed,  and  the  churches 
disappeared.  For  centuries  the  rule  of  the  Crescent 
has  rendered  the  churches,  and  the  cities  in  which  they 
existed,  desolate.  The  letters  of  Paul,  on  the  other 
hand,  dealing  so  strenuously  with  the  moral  questions 
which  emerged  in  the  first  churches,  and  laying  down 
so  clearly  the  new  ideals  and  regulations,  are  to  this  day 
our  greatest  aid  in  the  formation  and  application  of 
a  Christian  morality.  If  at  first  they  seem  to  present 
a  gloomy  picture  of  the  early  communities,  they  are  the 
best  security  we  have  for  those  forces  of  regeneration 
and  reform  which  had  begun  to  work  and  are  still  work- 
ing for  the  salvation  of  the  world. 

Once  in  the  first  preaching  of  the  Gospel  to  the 
Gentiles  Paul  and  his  associates  referred  a  question 
to  the  church  at  Jerusalem.  Under  the  presidency  of 
James,  the  apostles  and  elders  with  the  whole  church 
gave  a  decision  of  a  most  curious  kind.  The  Gentiles 
might  be  admitted  into  the  church  without  becoming 
Jews;  but  certain  necessary  things  must  be  exacted  of 
them,  one  moral,  the  others  outward  and  ceremonial 
(Acts  xv.  29).  They  also  urged  the  new  churches 
to  remember  the  poor,  viz.  the  impoverished  Christians 
in  Jerusalem  itself.  Paul  was  very  ready  to  comply 
with  this  last  request,  and  he  was  as  eager  as  they  were 
to  insist  on  moral  purity,  the  abstinence  from  fornica- 
tion. He  was  even  ready  to  dissuade  his  converts 
from  eating  the  meats  of  the  heathen  sacrifices,  if 
there  was  the  least  danger  of  giving  offence  to  weak 
consciences  ;  but  to  enforce  indifferent  points  of  Jewish 
ceremonial,    like    "  abstaining    from    blood   and    from 


FIRST    NOTE    OF    THE    CHURCH       115 

things  strangled,"  would  have  been  to  mix  the  weighty 
matters  of  the  law  with  the  trivial,  and  to  endanger 
the  whole  structure  of  Christian  ethics.  This  exhibi- 
tion of  the  moral  development  of  the  church  at  Jeru- 
salem discouraged  Paul  from  further  appeals  to  it; 
"they  who  were  reputed  to  be  pillars,"  James,  Peter, 
and  John,  "  imparted  nothing  to  him."  He  felt  it 
better  to  take  his  own  course,  and  under  the  guidance 
of  the  Holy  Spirit  given  to  him,  to  lead  the  church 
out  of  the  shadows  and  bondage  of  Judaism  into  the 
liberty  of  Christ. 

His  regulations,  therefore,  to  his  churches  are  made 
either  according  to  a  strict  command  of  Jesus,  or  by 
the  light  of  his  own  judgment  as  a  believer  in  Christ. 
The  questions  he  had  to  deal  with  were  of  very  varied 
importance,  and  his  judgments  were  partly  temporary, 
partly  lasting.  On  great  moral  questions  he  was  im- 
movable. He  was  specially  resolved  to  root  sexual 
irregularities  out  of  the  nascent  communities.  His 
method  of  dealing  with  a  special  case  at  Corinth 
brings  into  clear  relief  how  the  first  Christians  inter- 
preted the  commission  to  forgive  or  to  retain  sins, 
which  Christ  had  given  to  them.  The  most  remark- 
able feature,  in  the  light  of  later  developments,  is 
that  the  discipline  is  not  exercised  by  the  elders  and 
deacons,  or  any  functionaries,  but  by  the  whole  com- 
munity gathered  together  (I.  Cor.  v.  4).  If  there 
was  "confession"  it  was  mutual,  as  James  shows  (v.  16). 
The  verdict  was  passed  and  executed  by  the  whole 
church.  It  was  a  solemn  separation  of  the  offender  from 
the  company,   that  he  might  repent  and  be  restored. 


n6  THE    EARLY    CHURCH 

Paul  was  as  eager  to  receive  him  back  as  he  was 
to  expel  him.  But  the  one  object  to  be  sought  was 
to  keep  the  community  pure,  free  from  fornicators, 
covetous,  idolaters,  revilers,  drunkards,  and  extortioners 
(I.  Cor.  v.  n). 

In  this  way  a  church  became  an  active  force  for 
the  purging  of  society,  and  for  maintaining  a  standard 
of  goodness.  The  danger  which  has  come  from  putting 
such  disciplinary  power  into  the  hands  of  priests  or 
ecclesiastical  courts,  supported  by  the  temporal  arm, 
did  not  exist,  because  in  the  first  place  the  judgment 
was  that  of  the  whole  society,  and  in  the  second  place 
the  only  force  at  the  disposal  of  the  society  was  moral 
and  spiritual.  There  was  no  thought  of  temporal  dis- 
abilities. 

Paul  wished  his  church  to  be  a  genuine  substitute 
for  the  law-courts.  A  society  filled  with  the  Holy 
Spirit  could  settle  disputes  much  more  satisfactorily 
than  the  tribunals,  in  which  pagan  standards  prevailed. 
His  thought  was  that  the  church  should  be  a  state 
within  a  state,  setting  a  purer  example,  maintaining  a 
higher  justice,  securing  for  its  members  the  possibility 
of  living  a  quiet  and  peaceable  life  in  godliness  and 
honesty. 

Living  himself  a  laborious  and  ascetic  life,  he  was  yet 
careful  to  vindicate  the  rights  of  men,  to  marry,  to  earn 
their  living,  and  to  carry  on  the  ordinary  business  of 
citizens.  He  recognised  the  value  of  celibacy  for  those 
who  were  actively  engaged  in  the  work  of  spreading  the 
Gospel ;  perhaps  he  had  a  rather  gloomy  view  of  the 
troubles  which  darken  a  married  life ;  but  an  enforced 


FIRST    NOTE    OF    THE    CHURCH       117 

celibacy  would  have  seemed  to  him  perilous  in  the  ex- 
treme. In  his  dread  of  the  demoralisation  which  follows 
on  such  restrictions  he  advocated  the  marriage  of  all.  The 
bishops  and  deacons  especially  were  to  show  by  the 
ordering  of  their  own  families  and  the  training  of  their 
children  that  they  were  qualified  to  regulate  the  church. 

Some  of  Paul's  personal  opinions  and  practices  were 
not  perhaps  of  permanent  importance.  A  regulation 
like  that  which  requires  women  to  have  their  heads 
covered  in  public  worship  was  suitable  only  for  that  age 
and  the  countries  with  which  Paul  was  acquainted.  He 
would  have  been  angry  and  scandalised  if  he  could  have 
known  that  on  his  authority  women  have  made  this 
head-covering  the  excuse  for  extravagance  and  display. 
Paul  meant  the  head  to  be  covered  that  the  faces  of 
women  should  not  be  seen ;  women  have  covered  their 
heads  in  a  way  to  display  their  charms  and  make  them- 
selves more  prominent.  When  Paul  declares  that  he 
personally  did  not  allow  women  to  speak  in  the  church 
assemblies,  he  is  conscious  that  he  is  indulging  a  private 
view,  and  his  provision  for  women  speaking  with  their 
heads  covered  shows  that  he  did  not  expect  his  pre- 
dilection for  their  silence  to  be  observed. 

To  complete  the  picture  of  the  early  churches  as 
schools  of  goodness  we  must  note  the  continual  stress 
laid  on  the  moral  rectitude  of  the  leaders  and  teachers 
of  the  communities.  There  is  no  change  which  has 
stolen  into  the  church  in  the  lapse  of  time  more  glaring 
than  that  which  is  implied  in  the  doctrine  that  the 
efficacy  of  church  acts  is  not  affected  by  the  character  of 
ministers.     It  is  a  concession  to  human  infirmity  which 


n8  THE    EARLY    CHURCH 

destroys  the  first  note  of  the  church.  The  pastoral 
letters  of  the  New  Testament  offer  no  foothold  for  this 
perversion.  The  teacher  must  practise  what  he  teaches, 
and  be  the  example  in  his  own  person  of  what  he 
enjoins.  Indeed  the  ministry  in  the  early  church  was 
determined  so  exclusively  by  moral  considerations,  that, 
we  infer,  ministers  were  only  in  office  so  long,  and  in  so 
far,  as  they  carried  moral  authority.  Appointed  by  the 
church,  and  dependent  on  the  church,  wielding  no 
temporal  powers,  exercising  no  mysterious  functions, 
which  could  strike  terror  into  the  people,  without  any 
priestly  authority,  not  indispensable  for  baptizing  or 
observing  the  Supper,  or  exercising  the  discipline,  they 
retained  their  position  only  by  the  consent  of  the  com- 
munity, which  esteemed  them  highly  for  their  work's 
sake. 

§  3.  Perhaps  the  essentially  ethical  character  of  the 
early  churches  is  obscured  by  the  polemic  against  salva- 
tion by  works  which  plays  so  large  a  part  in  the  letters 
of  Paul.  Though  the  letter  of  James  offers  something 
of  a  counterblast  to  the  doctrine  of  justification  by  faith 
alone,  Luther  is  right  in  recognising  that  justification  by 
faith  is  the  distinctive  teaching  of  the  New  Testament, 
the  new  element  in  the  Gospel,  which  makes  it  a  gospel, 
as  distinguished  from  the  ancient  law. 

Paul's  vehement  plea  against  works  as  the  ground  of 
salvation,  and  his  fearless  assertion  of  grace  as  the  sole 
means  of  justification,  may  easily  give  to  a  hasty  reader 
the  impression  that  the  church  was  constituted  not  of  the 
good,  but  of  those  who  accepted  a  certain  doctrine  or 
received  an  external  rite.      But  such  an  impression  is 


FIRST    NOTE    OF    THE    CHURCH      119 

superficial.  The  real  reason  why  Paul  discredits  salvation 
by  merit  is  that  such  method  produces  only  a  low  type 
of  goodness.  The  works  which  are  done  in  order  to 
secure  salvation  cannot  be  in  the  best  sense  good ;  they 
are  too  self-conscious,  too  self-regarding ;  prompted  by  a 
personal  aim,  they  lose  their  ethical  quality. 

The  righteousness  which  is  of  faith,  the  distinctive 
product  of  the  Christian  revelation,  is  the  only  good- 
ness which  can  be  called  absolute.  That  righteousness 
is  the  Gospel.  Paul's  letters  interpreted  it,  and  made  it 
the  articuhis  stantis  ant  cadentis  eccksice.  The  polemic 
against  works,  therefore,  cannot  be  cited  to  show  that 
the  first  note  of  the  church  is  not  goodness ;  it  is  only 
the  evidence  that  the  goodness  of  the  church  was  a 
new  goodness,  capable  of  better  fruit  because  the  root  is 
better. 

The  doctrine  of  law,  whether  we  think  of  the  Jewish 
law,  or  of  Buddhism,  or  of  the  common  religious  con- 
ception that  we  are  saved  by  living  a  good  life,  has  a 
radical  defect.  If  the  law  is  merely  formal,  such  as  a 
man  with  diligence  can  keep,  it  produces  pharisaism,  a 
spiritual  disease,  the  sense  of  superiority  to  people  who 
know  not  the  law,  which  turns  worship  into  the  cry : 
"  I  thank  Thee  that  I  am  not  as  other  men."  If  the  law 
is  high  and  spiritual,  such  as  no  human  being  can  fully 
keep,  it  produces  the  apathy  of  despair.  The  dilemma 
presented  by  law,  therefore,  as  the  foundation  of  re- 
ligion, has  two  horns,  on  which  the  soul  is  impaled, 
and  good  becomes  impossible :  if  the  devotee  believes 
that  he  merits  and  has  earned  salvation,  he  cannot 
avoid  that  worst  moral  disease,  self-righteousness ;  if  he 


THE    EARLY    CHURCH 


believes  he  has  not  earned  it  and  cannot,  he  must  sink 
into  the  misery  of  self-imposed  torments,  a  despair 
which  involves  a  moral  paralysis. 

The  Gospel,  as  Paul  saw,  opened  up  a  new  way,  a 
fairer  prospect  for  mankind.  When  he  says  a  man  is 
saved  by  faith,  and  not  by  works  of  the  law,  he  does 
not  regard  faith  as  another  work,  so  meritorious  as  to 
take  the  place  of  the  rest ;  but  he  means  that  by  faith 
in  Christ  a  new  principle  comes  into  play.  Christ,  in 
the  language  of  John,  is  "the  propitiation" — i.e.  to 
believe  in  Him  is  to  be  freely  forgiven.  But  to  be 
freely  forgiven  binds  the  heart  in  gratitude  and  love  to 
Christ.  This  relation  to  Christ,  not  resting  on  anything 
that  we  have  done,  but  simply  on  His  goodness  and 
love,  has  a  transforming  effect.  It  is  essentially  what 
the  poet  says  : — 

"  Love  took  up  the   harp  of  life  and   smote  on  all   its 
chords  with  might, 
Smote  the  chord  of  self  which   trembling  passed   in 
music  out  of  sight." 

The  love  to  Christ,  as  the  means  of  forgiveness,  produces 
a  goodness  of  quite  another  quality  than  the  goodness 
of  self-conscious  merit.  The  righteousness  which  is  of 
God  by  faith  springs  from  a  heart  which  is  touched  and 
changed.  Self  has  disappeared.  One  who  is  saved  by 
faith  in  Christ  makes  no  claims,  is  conscious  of  no 
merit,  is  perfectly  humble,  absorbed  in  Him  who  has 
called  him  out  of  darkness  into  His  marvellous  light. 
Such  an  one  has  no  disposition  to  sit  in  judgment  on 
others ;  not  esteeming  himself  worthy,  he  is  disposed  to 


FIRST    NOTE    OF    THE    CHURCH      121 

think  all  others  worthier  than  himself.  The  master- 
principle  being  love  to  Christ,  he  is  constrained  to  serve, 
to  bless,  to  save,  all.  He  does  not  seek  to  save  men 
because  it  is  meritorious,  but  because  the  love  of  God 
is  shed  abroad  in  his  heart.  He  loves  all  men  for 
Christ's  sake.  He  cannot  injure  them;  love  forbids; 
the  Law  denounces  killing,  adultery,  stealing,  envy,  &c, 
but  more  potent  than  the  Law  is  Love.  He  cannot 
kill,  for  man  is  the  image  of  God;  he  cannot  commit 
adultery,  for  that  would  violate  the  temple  of  God ;  to 
steal  is  to  rob  God,  to  envy  is  to  reproach  Him.  The 
righteousness  which  is  of  faith,  therefore,  keeps  the  law, 
as  the  legal  righteousness  cannot,  under  the  constraining 
influence  of  love. 

Paul  is  not  alone  in  the  place  which  he  gives  to  love. 
Peter  and  John  agree  with  him.  But  it  is  Paul's  dis- 
tinction to  bring  out  that  the  love  which  is  the  motive 
of  the  new  goodness  is  connected  with  the  salvation  of 
faith,  as  distinct  from  the  salvation  of  merit. 

It  will  be  seen,  then,  that  the  note  of  the  church, 
goodness,  a  goodness  deeper  in  meaning,  richer  in 
content,  impelled  by  a  stronger  motive,  enforced  by  a 
higher  sanction,  is  struck  by  the  very  nature  of  salvation, 
a  salvation  which  results  from  faith  in  Christ  as  the 
ground  of  a  free  and  full  pardon  of  sin. 

And  as  Paul  is  successful  in  establishing  this  essential 
connection  between  redemption  and  goodness  by  an 
argument  which  never  loses  its  force  or  freshness,  so  he 
is  consistent  in  all  his  writings  in  using  every  doctrinal 
statement  as  a  fresh  ground  of  ethical  appeal.  Perhaps 
the    doctrinal   statements    are   sometimes   obscure,   and 


122  THE    EARLY    CHURCH 

difficult  to  follow ;  not  infrequently  they  rest  on  certain 
presuppositions  of  Hebrew  religion  which  are  alien  to 
us,  and  are  coloured  by  rabbinical  modes  of  argument 
which  do  not  carry  conviction ;  but  there  is  never  any 
hesitation  in  placing  Christ  crucified  in  the  forefront  as 
the  ground  of  saving  forgiveness :  "  The  grace  of  God 
has  appeared  bringing  salvation  to  all  men " ;  and  just 
as  little  is  there  any  flinching  from  the  ethical  lessons 
deduced  from  it.  Examine,  for  instance,  the  Epistle 
to  the  Romans  from  the  twelfth  chapter  onwards.  That 
"therefore"  is  the  hinge  on  which  the  whole  argument 
turns.  Because  of  the  grace  of  God,  the  pardon,  the 
saving  power  of  Christ,  this  life  of  moral  renewal  be- 
comes incumbent,  absolute  humility  and  mutual  service 
in  the  church — love,  patience,  generosity,  sympathy, 
readiness  to  forgive.  Good  is  triumphant.  The  dutiful 
conduct  of  a  citizen  in  the  state  results  from  the  same 
evangel;  the  social  duty  of  paying  debts  is  equally 
compulsory.  The  appeal  rises  to  an  extraordinary 
eloquence  :  "  Let  us  cast  off  the  works  of  darkness  and 
let  us  put  on  the  armour  of  light.  Let  us  walk  honestly 
as  in  the  day,  not  in  revelling  and  drunkenness,  not  in 
chambering  and  wantonness,  not  in  strife  and  jealousy. 
But  put  ye  on  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  and  make  not 
provision  for  the  flesh  to  fulfil  the  lusts  thereof."  We 
cannot  wonder  that  the  passage  converted  the  young 
Augustine  in  the  garden  at  Milan.  The  only  wonder  is 
that  its  trumpet-call  leaves  any  soul  in  Christendom 
sleeping,  and  merged  in  sin  and  uncleanness. 

The  canticle  of  love  in  I.  Cor.  xiii.  is  the  climax  of  a 
passage  on  the  functions  of  the  members  of  the  church, 


FIRST    NOTE    OF    THE    CHURCH      123 

the  interpretation  of  the  doctrine  of  the  Eucharist. 
The  Second  Epistle  to  Corinthians  is  a  heart-moving 
plea,  in  which  Paul  brings  all  his  personal  influence  to 
bear,  and  presses  the  claims  of  his  apostolate,  simply 
and  solely  to  purge  the  church  from  its  sins,  its  quarrels 
and  divisions.  Its  climax  is,  "  Be  perfected,  be  comforted, 
be  of  the  same  mind ;  live  in  peace ;  and  the  God  of  love 
and  peace  shall  be  with  you.  Salute  one  another  with  a 
holy  kiss."  The  ethical  note  is  so  dominant,  that  if  we 
did  not  use  these  letters  to  establish  doctrine  we  should 
yet  use  them  as  the  freshest  and  most  inclusive  exhorta- 
tions to  goodness  in  the  whole  range  of  literature. 

In  Galatians  we  find  the  fruit  of  the  Spirit  presented 
as  a  character,  evidently  the  character  of  Jesus  Himself. 
To  be  filled  with  the  Spirit  is  to  have  His  love,  His 
joy,  His  peace,  to  be  like  Him  long-suffering,  good  in 
feeling  and  in  act ;  to  be  meek  as  He  was  meek,  to  live 
by  faith,  and  to  control  the  appetites  and  passions  as  He 
did.  But  it  is  the  same  in  all  the  epistles  :  whatever  may 
be  the  theme,  they  are  passionate  appeals  for  goodness. 
And  in  the  latest  of  them,  the  Pastorals,  the  Pauline  in- 
sistence on  good  works  is  pushed  to  such  a  point  that 
it  seems  sometimes  almost  to  traverse  Paul's  own  doctrine 
of  justification.  ■  Seems,"  for  it  does  not  really.  The 
good  works  which  gleam  out  from  every  page  of  the 
Pastoral  Epistles  are  the  outcome  of  the  faith,  the  result 
of  being  saved  by  grace.  In  this  respect  the  closing 
paragraph  is  the  key  to  all :  "  When  the  kindness  of 
God  our  Saviour  and  His  love  toward  man  appeared, 
not  by  works  done  in  righteousness,  which  we  did 
ourselves,  but  according  to  His  mercy  He  saved  us, 


i24  THE    EARLY    CHURCH 

through  the  laver  of  regeneration  and  renewing  of 
the  Holy  Ghost,  which  He  poured  out  upon  us  richly 
through  Jesus  Christ  our  Saviour,  that  being  justified 
by  His  grace  we  might  be  made  heirs  according  to  the 
hope  of  eternal  life"  (Titus  hi.  4,  7). 

Goodness,  therefore,  a  new  goodness,  is  the  note 
of  the  church,  a  goodness  to  be  maintained  by  teach- 
ing, by  discipline,  by  faith  and  prayer,  by  "provoking 
one  another  to  good  works,"  because  the  saving  power 
of  the  church  depends  on  it. 

§  4.  Let  us  try  to  focus  this  intrinsic  meaning  of  the 
church  by  turning  back  to  the  First  Gospel,  the  only 
one  in  which  the  word  "ecclesia"  occurs.  Go  up  and 
watch  the  new-born  rill  where  it  issues  from  the  moun- 
tain of  revelation.  Mark  the  relation  between  the  ethics 
and  the  organisation  of  the  new  society,  between  the 
sanctity  and  the  hierarchy.  The  organisation,  the 
hierarchy,  is  merely  a  means  to  an  end.  The  end  is 
goodness,  real  goodness,  the  new  goodness.  If  good- 
ness does  not  result  the  church  is  naught — nay,  less  than 
naught — "  salt  which  has  lost  its  savour,  to  be  trodden 
under  foot  of  man."  The  stamp  or  mark  of  the  ministry 
is  the  moral  result :   "  By  their  fruits  ye  shall  know  them." 

This  is  how  Mr.  Allen,  in  the  "  Critical  Commentary  of 
St.  Matthew,"  sums  up  the  teaching  of  Christ  Himself 
on  the  subject  of  the  church.  The  perspective  may  not 
be  quite  accurate,  but  the  substance  is  all  here  :  "  The 
Messiah  had  come.  He  had  preached  the  coming  of 
the  kingdom.  He  had  been  put  to  death.  He  would 
come  at  the  end  of  the  age  on  the  clouds  of  heaven. 
In   the    meantime  His    disciples    were  to    preach    the 


FIRST    NOTE    OF    THE    CHURCH      125 

doctrine  of  the  kingdom  and  make  disciples  by  baptism 
into  the  name  of  the  Father  and  the  Son  and  the  Holy 
Ghost.  The  disciples  constituted  an  Ecclesia.  They 
were  to  cultivate  such  qualities  as  humility,  mercy, 
forgiveness,  and  love;  to  practise  almsgiving,  prayer, 
and  obedience  to  Christ's  commands.  They  were  to 
be  prepared  to  give  up  all  things  for  Christ's  sake — 
e.g.  marriage,  property,  earthly  relationships,  even  life 
itself.  They  were  to  rely  upon  God's  providence,  and 
to  avoid  the  accumulation  of  riches ;  wealth  was  a 
hindrance  to  admission  into  the  kingdom.  Marriage 
was  an  ordinance  of  God,  but  divorce,  except  for  for- 
nication, was  an  accommodation  to  human  weakness. 

"  The  righteousness  to  be  aimed  at  by  them  was  to 
be  based  on  right  motive  rather  than  observance  of 
rules,  upon  the  spirit  rather  than  the  letter  of  the  law. 

"All  the  disciples  were  brethren,  having  one  Father, 
God,  and  one  Master  and  Teacher,  Christ.  As  such 
they  constituted  the  Ecclesia,  and  possessed  common 
authority  to  legislate  for  the  church's  needs.  Wherever 
two  or  three  met  for  prayer  Christ  would  be  with  them. 

"  As  in  the  Jewish  Ecclesia,  so  in  the  Christian  there 
would  be  prophets,  wise  men,  and  scribes  "  (no  priests, 
it  will  be  observed).  "  But  from  among  the  disciples 
twelve  in  particular  were  commissioned  to  preach  and 
to  baptize.  Among  these  Peter  was  pre-eminent  (or 
rather,  '  the  first,'  x.  2).  To  him  was  first  revealed  the 
true  nature  of  the  Christ  which  was  to  be  the  foundation 
rock  of  the  church.  He  was  to  have  administrative 
and  legislative  power  within  the  kingdom,  a  power, 
however,  which  he  at  once  shared  with  the  others  who 


126  THE    EARLY    CHURCH 

believed  (cf.  xvi.  19,  xviii.  18).  In  the  kingdom  all 
twelve  would  sit  on  thrones,  'judging  the  twelve  tribes 
of  Israel.'"1 

Such  was  the  society  —  vitally  related  to  Christ, 
spiritually  in  the  midst,  washed  by  Him  in  initiation, 
and  kept  by  Him  in  the  daily  cleansing  of  the  feet  from 
the  dust  of  the  way — which  was,  as  a  new  creation, 
founded  in  the  world.  By  its  very  nature  it  must  act 
powerfully  on  mankind.  This  is  expressed  by  the 
Founder,  who  gave  it  the  name  of  Light  and  Salt. 
Light  is  diffusive.  Unless  it  is  unwisely  hidden  under 
a  bushel-measure,  the  lamp  gives  light  to  all  that  are 
in  the  house.  Unless  the  church  were  concealed  in 
a  way  not  designed  by  Christ,  it  would  shed  light  over 
the  world.  He,  while  He  was  in  it,  was  the  Light  of 
the  world ;  and  as  He  was  in  the  world,  so  was  His 
church  to  be,  the  light  of  the  world.  As  salt  preserves 
food  from  putrefaction,  and  gives  it  savour,  the  church 
was  to  preserve  the  world  from  corruption,  and  to  give 
meaning  and  point  to  the  world's  existence. 

But  while  the  church  would  be  a  missionary  agent  as 
the  depository  of  a  new  goodness,  which  would  radiate 
and  work  through  the  world,  that  new  goodness  itself 
involved  a  missionary  activity.  It  had  within  it  the 
impulse  which  it  derived  from  its  Lord.  He  came  into 
the  world  to  seek  and  to  save  that  which  was  lost; 
so  did  the  church.  He  was  a  Fisher  of  men,  and  He 
made  His  disciples  fishers  of  men.  He  likened  himself 
to  a  Good  Shepherd  who  went  to  seek  the  lost  sheep, 
who  would  lay  down  His  life  for  the  sheep ;  they,  too,  were 

1  "  St.  Matthew,"  W.  C.  Allen,  pp.  lxxv-vi. 


FIRST    NOTE    OF    THE    CHURCH      127 

to  be  shepherds  of  the  sheep  and  of  the  lambs,  and  to 
exercise  the  pastoral  care  in  the  same  self-sacrificing  way. 

Other  religions  seek  to  proselytise,  often  making  their 
proselytes  worse  than  they  were  before.  The  church 
did  not  seek  to  proselytise ;  she  had  no  interest  to  bring 
men  within  her  borders  and  to  magnify  herself;  she 
sought  to  save  men  for  their  own  sake.  She  was  em- 
bodied love,  seeking  and  saving  the  lost. 

The  command,  "  Go  ye  and  make  disciples  of  all 
nations,  teaching  them  to  observe  all  things  whatsoever 
I  commanded  you,"  was  as  a  formal  injunction  unneces- 
sary. The  impulse  was  in  the  Gospel  itself,  and  there- 
fore in  all  who  received  it.  The  missionary  work  is 
not  successful  when  it  is  done  in  obedience  to  a  legal 
enactment,  an  external  command  of  the  new  religion ; 
it  is  successful  when  it  is  the  outcome  of  the  new  good- 
ness, the  goodness  which  is  love  in  the  heart. 

The  church,  therefore,  immediately  manifests  its 
missionary  activity;  its  spread  is  rapid  and  inevitable. 
It  is  the  Gospel  itself  which  drives  Philip  to  Samaria, 
or  into  personal  conversation  with  the  Ethiopian  vizier. 
The  Gospel  itself  sends  Peter  to  Csesarea  and  to  Joppa, 
and  to  Babylon  in  the  distant  East  (I.  Pet.  v.  13), 
and,  according  to  extra-biblical  tradition,  to  Rome  in 
the  far  West.1  The  impulse  does  not  rest  on  the  com- 
mand given  to  the  Twelve  ;  for  Paul,  who  ostentatiously 

1  Some  think  that  Babylon  means  Rome,  because  in  the  Revela- 
tion Rome  is  denounced  under  the  name  of  Babylon  (xvii.  5).  But 
the  only  evidence  of  this  proposition  is  the  strong  conviction  which 
prevailed  at  the  end  of  the  second  century  that  Peter  was  martyred 
at  Rome. 


128  THE    EARLY    CHURCH 

separates  himself  from  them,  so  soon  as  he  is  converted, 
manifests  the  missionary  spirit  more  strikingly  than  they 
all.  His  missionary  energy  fills  the  New  Testament. 
In  the  Acts  and  the  Epistles  of  Paul  we  learn  to 
recognise  this  intrinsic  quality  of  the  church.  It  must 
advance  until  it  reaches  the  limits  of  the  world. 

But  in  noting  the  missionary  impulse  of  the  church, 
we  must  be  careful  to  remember  that  it  is  essentially 
bound  up  with  the  ethical  evangel.  Nothing  is  more 
alien  from  Christ  than  to  proselytise  with  the  effect  of 
making  men  worse,  or  leaving  them  as  they  were. 
Islam  proselytises  in  the  interest  of  Allah  and  his 
prophet.  Christ  seeks  men,  only  to  save  them,  and  His 
church  works  in  the  same  way.  Christ  does  not  seek 
His  own  glory ;  nor  does  the  church.  But  in  her  burns 
that  love,  which  is  God,  the  passion  to  save. 

The  church  then  loses  its  intrinsic  character  if  it 
ceases  to  be  missionary  ;  but  still  more  does  it  lose  its  in- 
trinsic character  if  it  becomes  proselytising.  The  effort 
to  swell  her  numbers,  to  increase  her  dominion,  to 
strengthen  her  authority,  is  a  departure  from  her  Lord. 
And  if  she  adopts  the  tricks  and  wiles  of  the  world  in 
the  enterprise,  sacrificing  humility,  truth,  justice,  mercy, 
compassing  sea  and  land  to  make  one  proselyte,  schem- 
ing, intriguing,  fighting,  in  councils,  or  on  backstairs, 
endeavouring  to  conquer  the  world  by  the  world's  ways, 
to  gain  men  as  her  subjects,  rather  than  to  save  them,  she 
loses  the  first  note,  the  intrinsic  quality,  which  identifies 
her  with  the  original  society  of  Jesus.  She  may  even 
become,  like  Rome  itself,  "  the  mother  of  the  harlots  and 
of  the  abominations  of  the  earth"  (Rev.  xvii.  5). 


CHAPTER  VI 

THE  SECOND  NOTE  OF  THE  CHURCH, 
BROTHERHOOD 

§  i.  Let  us  go  back  a  page  or  two.  The  teaching  of 
the  first  Gospel,  the  church-gospel,  was  that  "All  the 
disciples  were  brethren,  having  one  Father,  God,  and 
one  Master  and  Teacher,  Christ"  (Matt,  xxiii.  8-10). 
As  such  they  constituted  the  "ecclesia"  (xviii.  17),  and 
possessed  common  authority  to  legislate  for  the  church's 
needs  (xviii.  18).  Wherever  two  or  three  met  for 
prayer,  Christ  would  be  with  them  (xviii.  19;  cf. 
xxviii.  20).  This  noble  and  simple  equality  before 
God  was  not  inconsistent  with  variety  and  pre-eminence 
of  gifts.  The  analogy  of  the  family  is  always  at  hand, 
because  God  is  the  father  and  all  disciples  are  brothers. 
In  a  family  one  is  brilliant  and  able  and  influential, 
while  others  are  undistinguished,  without  force  or 
influence.  But  brother  does  not  take  a  throne  or 
exercise  an  authority  over  brother ;  the  influence  is 
due  not  to  office  but  to  character.  In  the  church  the 
earthly  grades  and  distinctions  were  forgotten,  but 
spiritual  eminence,  or  personal  gifts,  made  themselves 
felt,  and  exercised  their  legitimate  power. 

In  this  respect  the  church  differed  from  the  synagogue, 
129  1 


i3o  THE    EARLY    CHURCH 

though  from  the  first  it  had  a  tendency  to  degeneration 
and  reversion  to  type.  In  the  synagogue  all  sat  in 
ranks.  The  first  places  were  reserved  for  the  first 
people,  and  the  humble  folk  took  humble  places.  This 
very  natural  human  arrangement,  against  which  none, 
even  the  most  contemned,  thought  of  protesting,  was  in 
the  church  heresy  ;  it  was  denounced  as  "  holding  the 
faith  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  the  Lord  of  glory,  with 
respect  of  persons."  To  make  discrimination  accord- 
ing to  worldly  status  was  to  become  "  a  judge  with  evil 
thoughts."  It  was  sin,  bringing  the  transgressor  within 
the  judgment  of  the  law,  viz.  the  new  law  of  the  Gospel 
(Jas.  ii.  1-13). 

The  brotherliness  was  expressed  by  the  specific  appli- 
cation of  an  old  word.  In  Greek,  "brotherly  love" 
{Philadelphia)  meant  the  love  which  a  man  had  for 
members  of  his  own  family,  that  family  pride  and  family 
exclusiveness  which  is  the  natural  antithesis  of  love 
in  the  broad  human  sense.  In  this  way  the  epithet 
Philadelphus  was  bestowed  on  kings,  e.g.  Ptolemy, 
signifying  the  devotion  of  the  sovereign  to  his  own 
family  and  dynasty.  The  church  adopted  the  word 
to  express  the  relation  between  members.  They  were 
brothers  and  sisters.  Philadelphia  became  a  Christian 
virtue,  with  a  meaning  almost  the  opposite  of  its  mean- 
ing in  ordinary  Greek.  The  conversion  of  the  word 
symbolised  the  conversion  of  human  relations  which  was 
taking  place.  In  the  New  Testament  "brotherly  love" 
no  longer  means  the  love  of  your  family  and  kindred, 
but  the  love  of  others,  who,  by  their  faith  in  Christ, 
have  become  as  brothers  and  sisters.     Christ  claimed  as 


SECOND    NOTE    OF    CHURCH     131 

His  relatives,  not  His  mother  and  brothers  according  to 
the  flesh,  but  all  who  did  the  will  of  God.  This  great 
spiritual  idea  was  introduced  as  the  note  of  the  church. 
A  great,  and  to  the  old  world  incredible,  revolution 
underlies  such  familiar  passages  as :  "  In  love  of  the 
brethren  be  tenderly  affectioned  one  to  another,  in 
honour  preferring  one  another"  (Rom.  xii.  10);  "But 
concerning  love  of  the  brethren  ye  have  no  need  that 
one  write  unto  you,  for  ye  yourselves  are  taught  of  God 
to  love  one  another  "  (I.  Thess.  iv.  9) ;  "  Let  love  of  the 
brethren  continue;  forget  not  to  show  love  unto  strangers" 
(Heb.  xiii.  1).  The  origin  of  this  miraculous  brotherli- 
ness  is  found  in  the  new  birth  into  the  family  of  God : 
"  Seeing  ye  have  purified  your  souls  in  your  obedience 
to  the  truth  unto  unfeigned  love  of  the  brethren,  love 
one  another  from  the  heart  fervently :  having  been 
begotten  again,  not  of  corruptible  seed,  but  of  incor- 
ruptible, through  the  word  of  God,  which  liveth  and 
abideth"  (I.  Pet.  i.  22,  23).  The  place  which  it  takes 
in  the  catena  of  Christian  graces  is  noticeable :  after 
faith,  virtue,  knowledge,  temperance,  patience,  and  godli- 
ness, the  choral  company  is  completed  with  "love  of 
the  brethren  and  love,"  showing  that  the  love  of  the 
brethren  in  the  church  is  the  preparation  for  loving  all 
(II.  Pet.  i.  5-7).  The  quality  which  had  thus  adopted  an 
old  name,  giving  to  it  a  new  meaning,  was,  so  far  as  we 
can  read  the  ancient  world,  new;  and,  indeed,  in  the 
world  of  to-day  it  still  retains  its  specific  character  as  a 
mark  of  genuinely  Christian  societies.  It  differs  in  kind 
from  "love"  as  it  was  formerly  understood;  it  differs 
also  in  its  extension  and  application. 


i32  THE    EARLY    CHURCH 

The  world  knew  love  in  the  sense  of  the  sexual 
passion;  it  knew  love  in  the  sense  of  friendship,  the 
devotion  of  elect  and  kindred  spirits ;  how  difficult  it 
was  to  keep  these  two  from  blending,  and  from  so  de- 
generating, is  shown  in  Plato's  Symposium,  and  in  the 
tales  which  betray  the  characteristic  vice  of  Greece.  But 
when  the  early  preachers  of  the  Gospel  and  founders  of 
the  church  wished  to  express  in  Greek  the  new  emotion 
which  existed  in  the  church  and  bound  its  members 
together,  they  could  not  use  the  word  eros,  the  word 
for  the  sexual  passion,  nor  was  the  word  for  friendship 
warm  or  precise  enough.  They  took  a  word  unknown 
to  the  profane  writers,  which  was  found  occasionally  in 
the  LXX  (e.g.  2  Sam.  xiii.  15  ;  Song  of  Solomon  ii.  4, 
5,  7,  iii.  5,  10,  v.  8,  vii.  6,  viii.  4,  6,  7 ;  Jer.  ii.  2; 
Eccl.  ix.  1,  6;  Wisd.  iii.  9,  vi.  19).  This  was  agape. 
But  in  the  LXX  it  has  only  a  slightly  better  meaning 
than  the  other  Greek  words ;  it  means  "  the  love  which 
chooses  its  object  with  decision  of  will,  so  that  it  becomes 
self-denying  or  compassionate  devotion  to  and  for  the 
same  "  (Cremer,  s.v).  The  use  in  Jer.  ii.  2  approaches  the 
idea  which  the  word  would  convey  in  the  new  covenant. 
But  the  word  enters  the  New  Testament  with  a  new 
meaning.  It  is  now  love  in  its  fullest  conceivable  sense, 
love  as  the  distinguishing  attribute,  not  of  humanity, 
but  of  God.  It  was  first  exhibited  by  Christ  in  His 
redemption,  and  must  be  derived  from  Him  (I.  John 
iii.  16).  Indeed,  the  new  quality,  which  is  God's 
nature  instilled  into  the  church,  becomes  the  distinctive 
peculiarity  of  the  Christian  life. 

But  it  is  in  its  extent  and  application,  no  less  than  in 


SECOND    NOTE    OF    CHURCH     133 

its  quality,  that  agape  is  new.  Outside  the  church  men 
are  asked  to  love  their  relations  or  their  chosen  friends. 
But  the  church  rests  on  a  love  which  ignores  these 
personal  ties,  and  depending  on  faith  and  the  love  of 
God,  embraces  all  members,  of  whatever  rank  or  kind. 
Nor  is  the  love  confined  to  those  who  share  the  faith, 
and  form  the  brotherhood.  As  it  burns  towards  God, 
so  it  burns  towards  men,  even  all  men  (Rom.  xiii.  10). 
This  fruit  of  the  Spirit  is  distinguished  from  love  in  the 
ordinary  and  natural  sense.  God  loves  all,  and  this  is 
the  love  of  God  shed  abroad  in  men's  hearts,  embracing 
all  too. 

In  antiquity  it  seemed  miraculous.  By  it  the  world 
recognised  the  disciples  of  Christ.  It  was  an  amazing 
and  distinctive  quality.  In  the  literature  of  the  first 
age,  especially  in  the  early  apologies,  it  is  this  Divine 
love  of  man  for  man  which  is  pressed  as  the  evidence  of 
Christianity.  Christians  cared  and  sacrificed  for  one 
another,  would  die  for  one  another.  Christians  loved 
men,  even  their  enemies.  The  new  spirit  in  the  world 
was  at  first  incredible  to  men  who  had  been  brought  up 
only  in  the  traditions,  or  corruptions,  of  the  past.  But 
when  they  realised  the  fact  they  were  ravished  by  it. 
The  enthusiasm  which  is  depicted  in  Acts  ii.  repeated 
itself  everywhere.  With  great  joy  the  rich  surrendered 
their  possessions,  and  found  in  the  fellowship  something 
better.  They  received  a  hundred-fold  in  relatives  and 
property,  for  the  spiritual  family  was  real,  and  the  help  and 
succour  were  practical.  There  is  no  room  for  doubt  in 
the  New  Testament  that  agape  was  at  once  the  supreme 
and  inclusive  virtue,  and  the  link  by  which  the  com- 


134  THE    EARLY    CHURCH 

munity  was  bound  together.  The  brothers  walked  in 
it,  a  circumambient  atmosphere.  It  covered  a  multitude 
of  sins ;  the  sins  disappeared.  The  warm  and  lambent 
flame  played  about  their  heads,  spoke  in  their  tongues, 
assured  their  hearts.  They  knew  by  it  that  they  had 
passed  from  death  unto  life.  It  was  in  them  not  as  an 
argument  for  the  new  life,  but  as  the  new  life  itself. 

It  is  a  scornful  reproach  often  urged  against  Christians, 
:f  See  how  these  Christians  love  one  another  ! "  or  as  the 
sad  humorist  said,  "  We  are  all  brothers — Cains  and 
Abels  ! "  Christendom  is  apparently  torn  asunder,  and 
mutual  hatred  between  church  and  church,  or  sect  and 
sect,  or  man  and  man,  is  what  first  attracts  the  attention 
of  the  satirist.  But  the  force  of  the  satire  lies  entirely 
in  the  acknowledged  greatness  of  the  Christian  ideal. 
And,  miserable  as  is  the  shortcoming,  the  actual  love  in 
the  church  is  great.  This  note  is  by  no  means  wholly 
lost.  There  are  Christian  communities  which  possess 
the  agape  in  its  original  purity,  and  there  are  millions  of 
Christians  who  love  in  a  way  and  in  a  degree  only  made 
possible  by  the  faith,  the  love  of  God  shed  abroad  in 
their  hearts.  As  compared  with  the  non-Christian  world, 
Christendom  is  even  to-day  marked  out  by  the  charac- 
teristic which  the  Lord  mentioned,  "  By  this  all  men 
know  that  ye  are  my  disciples,  if  ye  have  agape  among 
yourselves"  (John  xiii.  35).  What  is  needed  is  that  the 
test  should  be  more  prominently  advanced,  and  that 
the  Church  should  specially  recognise  the  "  note  "  which 
the  Lord  Himself  indicated. 

Unfortunately  the  royal  road  was  left.  Through  the 
decay  of  the  first  eight  centuries,  the  church  held  that  the 


SECOND    NOTE    OF    CHURCH     135 

creed  was  the  first  bond  of  union.  So  far  from  admitting 
that  love  was  the  note  of  the  Church,  Christians  en- 
deavoured to  enforce  an  orthodox  creed  on  one  another 
with  the  bludgeon  and  the  sword.  From  the  ninth 
century,  at  least  in  the  West,  the  bond  of  union  was  a 
hierarchy,  a  powerful  political  organisation,  in  which 
love  had  little  or  no  place. 

Hardly  yet  does  any  church  venture  to  say,  "The 
first  note  of  the  church  is  holiness,  the  second  love ; 
by  this  we  claim  to  be  recognised  as  Christ's  disciples." 
But  when  this  return  is  made  to  the  idea  of  the  Founder 
the  church  will  rapidly  conquer  the  world.  Omnia 
vincit  amor.  It  is  a  singular  thing  that  amor,  which 
is  love,  read  backwards,  is  Roma.  Rome  as  a  church 
reversed  the  love  which  is  Christ's  test. 

§  2.  The  unhappy  mistake  of  endeavouring  to  define 
the  church  by  the  nature  of  her  ministry  has  been 
attended  with  disastrous  results.  The  earthly  distinc- 
tions in  the  church  were  not  rased,  in  order  to  set 
up  new  distinctions  fraught  with  spiritual  terrors  and 
tyranny.  The  brotherhood  of  the  church  has  been 
lost  by  a  false  distinction  between  clergy  and  laity, 
between  priests  and  people. 

In  the  New  Testament  the  "clerus"  is  the  whole 
community  of  the  church.  This  is  established  from 
the  Epistle  of  Peter,  who  is  presumably  the  head  of 
clerical  assumption.  Peter,  addressing  the  elders  of 
the  church  as  a  fellow-elder,  forbids  them  to  lord  it 
over  the  "  clergy,"  by  which  he  means  the  whole  flock 
of  God.  They  are  shepherds,  not  lords;  their  duty 
is  to   feed  the  sheep,   anticipating  the  reward  of  the 


136  THE    EARLY    CHURCH 

Arch-shepherd  (I.  Pet.  v.  3,  4).  When  the  clergy  are 
separated  from  the  people,  and  still  more  when  they 
claim  to  be  "the  church,"  a  radical  change  is  made 
in  the  conception  of  Christian  brotherhood.  By  ghostly 
terrors,  by  a  powerful  organisation,  seeking  and  often 
gaining  the  support  of  the  secular  arm,  the  hierarchy, 
for  centuries,  lorded  it  over  the  heritage  of  God.  That 
clericalism,  as  alien  to  the  Gospel  as  it  became  odious 
to  mankind,  is,  as  the  famous  French  statesman  said, 
"the  enemy."  It  destroys  the  genius  of  the  Gospel, 
it  reduces  the  New  Testament  to  a  cipher,  and  with- 
holds from  the  people  the  book  which  annihilates  its 
claims.  Following  the  example  of  Judaism  and  of  the 
Hellenic  religions,  clericalism  transformed  itself  into  sacer- 
dotalism. It  took  the  imagery  of  the  New  Testament, 
which  called  the  whole  church  a  royal  priesthood,  and 
by  a  perverted  literalism  used  it  to  sanction  a  priest- 
hood within  the  church,  drawing  a  sharp  distinction 
between  priest  and  people.  It  is  Peter  again,  in  whose 
name  the  sacerdotal  system  is  defended,  that  most 
emphatically  repudiates  it.  Knowing  not,  nor  dream- 
ing, of  any  priestly  order  in  the  church,  he  addresses 
the  whole  community  in  the  words  :  "Ye  as  living  stones 
are  built  up,  a  spiritual  house,  to  be  a  holy  priesthood, 
to  offer  up  spiritual  sacrifices,  acceptable  to  God  through 
Jesus  Christ"  (I.  Pet.  ii.  5).  And,  as  if  to  exclude 
the  idea  that  he  is  speaking  to  a  selected  number,  to 
the  elders  and  deacons  the  ministers  of  the  community, 
he  adds:  "Ye  are  an  elect  race,  a  royal  priesthood, 
a  holy  nation,  a  people  for  God's  own  possession, 
that  ye  may   show  forth  the  excellencies  of  Him  who 


SECOND    NOTE    OF    CHURCH     137 

called  you  out  of  darkness  into  His  marvellous  light" 
(I.  Pet.  ii.  9). 

Thus  the  New  Testament  presents  this  remarkable 
testimony :  priests  and  priesthood  are  seldom  mentioned 
at  all,  except  in  reference  to  the  Old  Testament  religion. 
But  when  they  are  used  in  connection  with  Christ 
and  Christianity,  their  occurrence  absolutely  precludes 
the  idea  of  a  priestly  order.  The  Epistle  to  the 
Hebrews^  which  contrasts  the  old  covenant  with  the 
new,  names  as  the  representative  of  the  priest  in  the 
old  covenant,  not  the  presbyter  or  deacon  of  the  new, 
but  Jesus  Christ  Himself  (v.  6,  vii.  17,  21,  viii.  4, 
x.  21).  And  Peter,  the  first  of  believers  and  apostles, 
expressly  shows  that  the  whole  community  of  Christians, 
and  not  an  order  of  ministers,  constitutes  the  "  priest- 
hood" of  the  church.  Only  in  one  other  book  of  the 
New  Testament  is  the  word  "priest"  used  in  connec- 
tion with  the  Christian  church.  In  the  Apocalypse 
Christians  are  called  priests  and  kings  unto  God ;  the 
ransomed,  who  are  loosed  from  their  sins,  and  not 
the  ministers  as  such,  are  thus  designated  (i.  6,  v.  10). 
All  who  have  part  in  the  first  resurrection  will  be 
exempt  from  the  power  of  the  second  death;  "they 
shall  be  priests  of  God  and  Christ "  (Rev.  xx.  6).  By 
showing  clearly  who  are  meant  by  the  priests  of  Christ, 
John  definitely  excludes  the  possibility  of  priests  in  a 
narrower  and  official  sense. 

The  early  church  had  a  ministry,  as  we  have  seen,  but 
its  function  was  not  to  lord  it  over  the  people.  The 
Lord  of  the  Church  was  among  them  at  the  beginning 
not  to  be  ministered  unto  but  to  minister ;  He  washed 


THE    EARLY    CHURCH 


the  feet  of  the  disciples,  and  told  them  they  were  to  do 
the  same  for  one  another.  It  was  this  ministry  which 
He  transmitted  to  His  representatives.  On  the  other 
hand,  His  kingship,  His  priesthood,  He  exercised 
Himself  by  His  promised  presence  in  the  midst  when 
they  assembled  in  His  name.  The  ministers,  therefore, 
were  teachers,  and  above  all  examples  to  the  flock. 
Some  of  them  gave  themselves  to  the  word  and  to 
prayer,  others  undertook  the  financial  arrangements  of 
the  church.  With  such  sacred  duties  entrusted  to  them 
by  the  Holy  Ghost  they  deserved  the  esteem,  and  were 
entitled  to  the  support,  of  the  community,  by  whom  they 
were  recognised  and  appointed.  It  was  a  constant  aim 
of  Paul  to  get  these  ministers  duly  honoured,  but  it  was 
still  more  his  aim  to  see  that  they  were  deserving  of 
honour,  because  he  recognised  that  the  obedience  and 
devotion  of  the  people  must  be  voluntary,  and  the 
ministers  could  only  be  esteemed  highly  "for  their 
work's  sake." 

Obviously  the  position  of  eminence,  of  spiritual  leader- 
ship, and  of  financial  administration,  had  its  dangers. 
Following  the  analogy  of  human  institutions,  it  was 
inevitable,  unless  some  power  intervened,  that  the 
leaders  would  grasp  at  power,  would  turn  the  crozier  into 
a  sceptre,  and  the  mitre  into  a  crown.  Humanly  speak- 
ing, the  ministers  of  the  church  were  sure  to  become  a 
hierarchy,  a  priesthood,  a  government  after  a  political  type. 
But  if  the  indications  of  the  New  Testament  may  be 
followed,  this  result,  so  far  from  being  contemplated  by 
the  Founder  and  the  first  Apostles,  was  deliberately 
precluded.     The  New  Testament  might  be  supposed  to 


SECOND    NOTE    OF    CHURCH     139 

have  survived  and  to  retain  its  authority,  on  purpose  to 
rebuke  the  usurping  power,  and  to  show  that  "  in  the 
beginning  it  was  not  so." 

The  relation  of  the  brotherhood,  and  of  the  ministry 
to  the  rest,  was  not  formal,  official,  authoritative,  but 
moral  and  spiritual.  This  is  brought  out  in  I.  Cor. 
xi.-xiv.  This  passage  must  be  studied  in  its  entirety. 
It  gives  the  theory,  and  what  ought  to  be  the 
practice,  of  the  Christian  ministry.  The  whole  church 
is  the  body  of  Christ.  Paul  is  thinking  for  the 
moment  of  the  local  community,  but  that  is  always 
merely  the  microcosm  of  the  whole  church.  In  the 
body  all  the  members  have  their  function.  The  minister, 
as  he  is  called  later,  is  only  a  member  of  the  body 
which,  like  the  tongue,  is  more  heard  than  other  parts. 
But  every  part  is  equally  important,  if  not  equally 
prominent.  The  body  is  One,  and  therefore  the  essential 
factor  in  it  is  the  principle  of  unity,  and  that  is  love. 
Reviewing,  therefore,  all  the  particular  manifestations  of 
spiritual  activity  in  the  church,  he  passes  to  what  is,  in 
comparison  with  them  all,  "  a  more  excellent  way."  Of 
course  he  has  no  thought  of  priestly  functions.  No 
doubt,  if  a  priesthood  were  a  Christian  ordinance  and 
a  means  of  salvation,  its  functions  would  be  more 
important  than  love ;  but  looking  at  the  ministry  as  he 
understood  it,  the  ministry  of  prophets,  teachers,  helps, 
and  governments,  he  shows  that  these  all  without  love 
are  useless.  The  spiritual  utterance,  the  eloquence, 
which  in  Corinth  was  admired,  became  sounding  brass 
or  a  clanging  cymbal,  without  love.  The  revelation  of 
spiritual  truth  was  equally  depreciated  in  comparison  of 


i4o  THE    EARLY    CHURCH 

love.  Faith,  that  powerful  weapon  by  which  even 
miracles  could  be  wrought,  is  nothing  unless  love  is 
there.  All  the  ministry  of  almsgiving  and  of  voluntary 
martyrdom,  apart  from  love,  profits  nothing.  Thus 
the  ministry  of  the  church  is  subordinate  to  the  spirit 
of  the  church.  That  spirit  is  love.  Everything  else 
is  secondary  and  instrumental,  but  love  is  the  essence 
of  it  all.  The  mutual  love  is  the  condition  of  mutual 
service,  just  as  love  to  the  outer  world  is  the  condition 
of  serving  and  saving  the  world. 

Paul  had  in  mind  chiefly  men  or  women  who  were 
apt  to  preach  and  to  exercise  the  lustrous  spiritual  gifts  : 
he  sternly  imposed  on  them  this  test  of  love,  declaring, 
as  well  he  might,  that  it  was  the  commandment  of 
the  Lord  (xiv.  37).  The  burden  of  the  discourse  in  the 
upper  room,  on  the  last  night  before  He  was  betrayed, 
was  the  new  commandment  of  mutual  love,  of  loving 
one  another  as  He  had  loved  His  disciples.  All  forms 
of  ministry  in  the  church  were  and  would  always  be 
futile,  if  that  new  commandment  were  neglected.  It  is 
evident  that  the  same  test  must  be  applied  to  all  later 
developments  of  the  ministry,  and  nothing  can  stand 
which  does  not  abide  that  test.  If  organisation  crushes 
love  it  ceases  to  be  Christian.  If  ministerial  offices  and 
functions  cease  to  minister  to  love,  they  cease  to  be 
Christian.  It  is  greatly  to  be  deplored  that  in  the 
growth  of  the  church  as  an  institution  this  principle  was 
forgotten.  Orthodoxy  was  the  test,  but  underlying 
orthodoxy  must  be  love,  or  it  ceases  to  be  orthodox. 
Power  was  the  object,  but  unless  power  is  wielded  in 
pure  love   it  is  not    divine.     It  is  the  power   of  love, 


SECOND    NOTE    OF    CHURCH     141 

not  the  love  of  power,  which  was  to  organise  and 
direct  the  community  of  Christ. 

We  should  do  well,  in  view  of  the  great  consumma- 
tion at  which  we  are  all  aiming — viz.  that  Christ  should 
gather  together  in  one  the  great  human  family — not  to 
spend  our  strength  in  assailing  different  views  of  church 
government  and  organisation,  but  to  test  everything  by 
the  one  principle  of  love,  and  to  aim  first  at  that.  If 
the  Papacy  made  all  who  love  the  name  of  Christ  love 
one  another  also,  it  would  be  thereby  accredited. 
Nothing  else  would  give  it  the  divine  imprimatur.  If 
Episcopacy  knits  the  church  together  in  a  holy  brother- 
hood, it  justifies  itself.  If  Presbyterianism  produces 
love  to  them  who  are  within  and  to  them  who  are  without, 
it  carries  its  commission  with  it.  If  Congregationalism 
makes  churches  which  are  holy  families  of  Divine  love  it 
is  right.  If  Methodism  maintains  a  genuine  love  feast, 
it  needs  no  further  commendation.  But  if  these  or  any 
other  church  organisations  lack  the  true  note,  fail  to 
produce  the  first  fruit  of  the  Spirit,  love,  no  logical 
defence  of  their  hierarchies,  or  repudiation  of  hierarchies, 
should  produce  conviction. 

The  church  is  a  brotherhood  :  "  One  is  your  Master, 
even  Christ,  and  all  ye  are  brethren."  It  is  only  by 
virtue  of  that  Divine  fire  of  love  within  it,  that  it  is  a 
holy  priesthood,  able  to  offer  up  spiritual  sacrifices, 
acceptable  to  God  through  Jesus  Christ. 

§  3.  The  ecclesia  is  autonomous.  The  brotherhood 
is  the  government.  As  the  ecclesia  of  Athens  was  the 
sovereign  assembly,  and  Pericles  or  Demosthenes  only 
reasoned  with  it,  convinced  it,  and  so  led  it,  the  Christian 


i42  THE    EARLY    CHURCH 

ecclesia,  with  Christ  in  the  midst,  is  her  own  authority. 
Even  the  greatest  of  her  members,  Augustine,  Luther, 
or  Wesley,  is  only  able  to  lead  by  the  suasion  of  truth 
and  the  gift  of  the  Spirit. 

The  autonomy  of  the  congregation  in  the  New 
Testament  is  surprising,  both  on  account  of  the  poor 
materials  of  which  the  church  was  composed,  and  also 
because  the  Apostles,  fresh  from  the  experience  of 
Christ,  and  endued  with  the  Holy  Spirit,  were  yet 
present,  and  might  have  seemed  entitled  to  override 
this  independence.  But,  in  the  case  of  Paul,  at  any  rate 
{in  the  case  of  the  Twelve  our  information  is  defective), 
the  apostolic  authority  was  only  used  to  elicit  and 
establish  the  congregational  independence.  In  no  case 
are  officers  or  ministers  appointed  without  the  consent 
of  the  congregation.  If  there  is  doubt  whether  the 
church  elected,  it  is  certain  that  it  showed  its  approba- 
tion. A  decree  made  by  the  Twelve  at  Jerusalem  was 
valid  only  because  it  was  issued  "with  the  whole 
church"  (Acts  xv.  22).  The  discipline  was  exercised 
by  the  whole  church  assembled  in  the  name  of  Jesus ; 
the  apostolic  authority  was  present  only  as  a  spirit  of 
counsel  and  support.  The  men  who  were  called  upon 
to  exercise  this  sovereign  function  of  government, 
legislative  and  administrative,  were  morally  ill-developed ; 
tainted  with  heathenism,  they  with  difficulty  escaped 
from  their  past.  But  it  does  not  occur  to  the  Apostles 
to  delay  their  franchise  until  they  are  full  grown,  until 
they  can  be  fed  on  meat  and  not  merely  on  milk. 
Rather,  as  in  political  training  generally,  the  power  to 
exercise  the  functions  of  government,  the  responsibility 


SECOND    NOTE    OF    CHURCH     143 

of  decision  and  of  action,  can  be  acquired  only  by 
practice.  These  mere  "  babes  in  Christ,"  admitted  into 
the  brotherhood,  are  treated  as  men,  and  are  trained  to 
do  the  work  of  the  church  by  doing  it. 

Nothing,  therefore,  is  more  deplorable  than  when  the 
rights  of  the  church  are  taken  away  from  the  body  itself, 
"  the  fulness  of  Him  that  filleth  all  in  all "  (Eph.  i.  23), 
and  usurped  by  a  clergy  or  priesthood.  The  brother- 
hood is  lost ;  the  fundamental  conception  of  the  church 
as  a  society  of  those  who  by  love  serve  one  another  is 
sacrificed  to  the  conception  of  a  worldly  empire  or 
government.  Against  this,  Jesus  from  the  very  first 
protested.  When  the  first  disciples  were  seeking  places 
of  pre-eminence  in  the  church,  He  said:  "Ye  know 
that  the  rulers  of  the  Gentiles  lord  it  over  them,  and 
their  great  ones  exercise  authority  over  them.  Not  so 
shall  it  be  among  you,  but  whosoever  would  become 
great  among  you  shall  be  your  minister ;  and  who- 
soever would  be  first  among  you  shall  be  your  servant : 
even  as  the  Son  of  man  came  not  to  be  ministered  unto 
but  to  minister,  and  to  give  His  life  a  ransom  for  many  " 
(Matt.  xx.  25-28). 

When  the  church  is  governed  by  those  who  "lord  it 
over"  the  flock,  and  "exercise  authority  over  them,"  the 
note  of  the  church  is  gone.  This  is  so  essential  a  quality 
of  the  primitive  society,  the  moral  and  spiritual  training 
depends  so  absolutely  on  the  inner  relations  of  brother- 
hood and  mutual  love,  that  it  must  always  be  the  chief 
aim  of  church  reformers  to  recover  the  lost  note. 

Hamack  in  the  "  Essays  on  the  Social  Gospel,"  x  shows 

1  Williams  &  Norgate. 


144  THE    EARLY    CHURCH 

how  Luther  contemplated  a  reform  of  this  kind.  "  In 
spite  of  the  high  esteem  in  which  Luther  had  always 
held  civic  authority  and  the  State,  his  original  intention 
was  to  reconstruct  the  church  on  the  simple  basis  of 
government  by  the  congregation.  He  had  visions  of  a 
congregational  life  founded  upon  fellowship  and  on 
principles  of  Christian  liberty,  fraternity,  and  equality. 
It  was  further  his  idea  that  the  national  element  should 
find  free  expression,  only  the  nation  then  meant  the 
Roman  empire  of  German  nationality,  and  he  had  in 
view  an  improvement  in  the  general  economic  condition 
of  the  country,  an  increase  in  its  culture,  and  the  up- 
raising of  downtrodden  classes.  Not  that  these  were  in 
his  eyes  separate  and  independent  ideals ;  rather  he  was 
convinced  that  a  return  to  the  Gospel  would  inevitably 
bring  about  their  realisation.  Therefore  there  was  no 
immediate  need  to  press  them ;  he  could  afford  to  wait 
if  necessary ;  only  the  Gospel  must  have  free  course  " 

(P-sO-  .  .... 

Because  Luther  failed  to  realise  this  idea  in  his  re- 
formation, a  task  remains  for  the  church  in  Germany  to 
attempt.  "  Next  to  the  preaching  of  the  Gospel,  the 
reconstruction  of  congregational  life  is  the  chief  evan- 
gelical-social task  now  before  the  Church  "  (p.  77).  For, 
as  Harnack  says  in  his  forceful  way,  "  Our  historical 
retrospect  has  shown  us  that  it  is  an  essential  part  of 
Christianity  to  weld  the  individual  members  of  a  con- 
gregation into  a  brotherhood  full  of  active  life,  and  then 
to  knit  such  congregations  together  into  a  great  associa- 
tion of  willing  helpers,  and  that  when  in  course  of  time 
congregational  life  collapsed,  this  meant  a  serious  loss 


SECOND    NOTE    OF    CHURCH     145 

to  the  church.  In  the  early  days  of  Christianity  active 
philanthropy  was  one  of  the  most  persuasive  methods 
of  propaganda,  and  Jesus  Christ  Himself  preached  the 
Gospel  while  He  went  about  doing  good.  If  sin  is  at 
the  root  of  misery,  misery  and  error  in  turn  produce 
fresh  sin  and  shame.  Therefore  war  must  be  waged 
upon  misery,  but  to  win  the  day  two  things  are  essential, 
personal  influence  from  man  to  man,  and  the  growth  of 
genuine  congregational  life  "  (p.  75). 

It  is  remarkable,  therefore,  that  the  watchwords  of  the 
French  Revolution,  which  were  shrieked  to  the  sound 
of  the  tocsin,  when  a  corrupt  church  and  social  order 
fell  together,  are  the  watchwords  of  the  early  church. 
"  Liberty,  equality,  fraternity "  were  to  be  secured  by 
the  societies  of  those  who  believed  in  Christ.  As  they 
believed  in  Him,  and  were  born  into  newness  of  life, 
they  took  their  places  in  a  new  order.  The  liberty  with 
which  Christ  made  them  free  saved  them  from  the  yoke 
of  an  external  law.  Each  one  as  a  child  of  God  was  at 
home  in  his  Father's  house.  It  was  a  duty  not  to  be 
entangled,  nor  to  let  others  be  entangled,  again  in  the 
yoke  of  bondage.  One  was  their  Master,  even  Christ. 
His  authority  was  recognised  as  final,  but  it  annihilated 
all  subordinate  authority.  At  the  time  political  liberty 
was  not  yet  born ;  even  the  highest  enfranchisement, 
that  of  a  Roman  citizen,  was  serfdom  to  an  autocrat, 
who  might  be  a  Trajan  or  M.  Aurelius,  but  might  also 
be  a  Nero  or  Caracalla.  But  to  enter  the  church  was 
to  escape  from  the  bondage  of  the  empire,  and  to  enter 
into  the  liberty  of  Christ.  There  were  no  tyrannical 
potentates,  bishops,  or  priests,  claiming  authority  and 

K 


146  THE    EARLY    CHURCH 

enforcing  their  will.  The  man  was  free,  Christ's  freed- 
raan.  He  served  the  rest,  not  by  compulsion  but  by 
love.  He  did  not  wish  to  lord  it  over  them.  The 
severest  thing  which  could  be  said  by  an  apostle  of  a 
member  of  that  community  was :  "  he  loveth  to  have 
the  pre-eminence  among  them  "  (III.  John  9).  In  the 
early  church  liberty  was  born.  Whenever  the  church 
is  renewed  liberty  revives. 

The  equality  was  not  achieved  by  destroying  but  by 
ignoring  the  distinctions  of  rank.  In  Christ  there  was 
neither  Jew  nor  Gentile,  Greek  nor  Scythian,  male  nor 
female,  bond  nor  free.  The  distinctions  were  imperfectly 
obliterated,  and  before  a  genuine  equality  was  reached 
the  old  social  hierarchy  intruded.  But  the  idea  was 
never  lost — an  idea  of  startling  novelty,  which  must 
ultimately  prevail,  and  sweep  away  the  divisions  which 
keep  men  asunder.  In  Christ  the  middle  wall  of 
partition  between  Jew  and  Gentile — the  most  intract- 
able line  of  exclusiveness  in  the  world — was  broken 
down.  When  Christ  entered  the  Greek  world  He 
brought  the  barbarian  with  Him.  The  distinction 
between  male  and  female  lingered,  as  we  see  in  the 
Epistles  of  Paul,  but  it  was  bound  to  go.  When  the 
woman  prophesied  or  prayed  under  the  influence  of 
the  Spirit,  no  artificial  regulation  could  silence  her. 
The  long  survival  of  slavery  is  very  perplexing ;  but  in 
the  early  church  the  slave  was  as  welcome  as  the  free- 
man. His  spiritual  power  often  made  him  the  teacher 
of  his  master.  And  though  the  leaven  of  love  worked 
slowly,  the  principle  was  laid  down,  incredible  to 
Aristotle,  who  regarded  slaves  as  intrinsically  different 


SECOND    NOTE    OF    CHURCH     147 

from  men,  that  manhood  was  more  important  than 
wealth  or  status. 

In  many  ways  the  early  church  was  a  prophecy; 
it  sowed  a  seed  for  distant  centuries ;  and  in  the  matter 
of  equality  it  proceeded  by  securing  the  spiritual  reality, 
without  denouncing  that  institution  of  slavery  which 
seems  to  us  now  so  glaringly  inconsistent  with  the 
Gospel. 

The  fraternity  which  the  French  sought  to  attain 
by  revolution  in 

"  The  red  fool-fury  of  the  Seine," 

which  Socialism  hopes  to  attain  by  an  economic  recon- 
struction, was  the  dream,  the  suggestion,  of  the  early 
church.  For  a  time  it  seemed  capable  of  realisation; 
as  the  societies  were  formed  on  the  basis  of  faith  in 
Christ,  breathing  the  prayer  "  Our  Father,"  they  were 
and  felt  themselves  to  be  brotherhoods.  And  though 
the  societies  were  small,  "  a  little  flock,"  and  the  whole 
world  seemed  to  "lie  in  the  wicked  one,"  the  mission- 
ary impulse  seemed  irresistible;  the  Father  of  all  the 
families  of  the  earth  would  surely,  through  His  well- 
beloved  Son,  make  all  men  brethren.  The  universal 
church  would  be  a  single  family,  embracing  all  races 
and  all  countries  of  mankind. 

The  disappointment  in  the  achievement  of  the  ideal 
is  part  of  that  mystery,  which  must  be  considered  in 
the  last  chapter  of  this  book.  What  hindered  ?  or  what 
hinders?  Was  the  ideal  too  high?  Was  the  force 
of  love  insufficient?     Was  human  egotism  too  strong? 


148  THE    EARLY    CHURCH 

Or  is  the  evolution  of  truth  and  life  necessarily  slow  ? 
Is  there  necessarily  a  reversion  to  type,  a  recession  from 
heights  of  thought  and  goodness  temporarily  won? 
The  point  to  remember  is  that  the  church,  in  her 
inception,  was  for  the  first  time  in  the  history  of  the 
world  the  promise  of  a  universal  brotherhood  of  man, 
in  which  all  distinctions  were  subordinated  to  the 
burning  consciousness  of  the  Divine  Fatherhood. 

§  4.  Of  this  liberty,  equality  and  fraternity,  which 
were  the  essence  of  the  church,  an  outward  and  visible 
sign  was  secured  in  the  Supper.  The  earliest  notice 
we  have  of  this  sacrament  is  in  I.  Cor.  xi. ;  in  studying 
the  early  church,  therefore,  we  are  bound  to  accept  the 
clue  which  is  offered  by  this  passage.  x\n  extraordinary 
change  occurred  in  the  observance  and  significance  of 
this  rite  before  the  end  of  the  second  century.  Its 
original  meaning  disappeared,  and  a  new  meaning  was 
given  to  it,  of  which  the  first  century  knows  nothing. 

We  are,  however,  now  only  concerned  with  the  way 
in  which  Paul  regarded  the  Supper,  when  he  wrote  to 
the  Corinthians.  At  that  time,  in  the  first  generation 
of  Christians,  the  Supper  was  a  genuine  meal.  The 
brethren  assembled,  we  suppose  on  the  evening  of  the 
first  day  of  the  week,  and  ate  and  drank  together. 
The  meal  was  a  reproduction  of  the  Lord's  Supper; 
it  was  taken  in  remembrance  of  Him.  The  abuse 
which  had  already  crept  into  the  community  at  Corinth, 
the  abuse  which  gives  occasion  for  this  earliest  and 
most  authentic  account  of  the  Supper  and  its  meaning, 
shows  us  with  startling  clearness  what  the  institution 
was. 


SECOND    NOTE    OF    CHURCH     149 

Throughout  the  Greek  world  it  was  the  custom  to 
give  feasts  in  which  every  one  contributed  his  share 
of  provisions  (epavos,  Lat.  ccena  collaticid).  The  meal 
was  made  by  treating  the  contributions  as  the  common 
stock.  The  Supper  was  a  coina  collaticia  ;  each  member 
of  the  church  brought  a  portion ;  all  ate  it  together. 
In  Corinth  the  distinctions  of  wealth  and  status  were 
preserved,  and  even  emphasised,  by  the  rich  eating 
their  better  fare,  and  leaving  the  poor  to  eat  theirs. 
Some  at  the  Supper,  therefore,  were  surfeited,  and  some 
were  left  hungry.  In  this  way  the  feast  lost  its  char- 
acter as  an  agape,  a  religious  symbol  of  the  brotherhood 
of  love. 

In  order  to  correct  the  abuse,  and  restore  the  Supper 
to  its  right  spiritual  value,  Paul  recites  the  origin  of  it, 
and  offers  a  clear  interpretation.  The  bread  which 
the  Lord  broke  and  divided  among  the  disciples,  calling 
it  His  body,  symbolised  the  brotherhood.  "  For  as 
the  body  is  one  and  hath  many  members,  and  all  the 
members  of  the  body,  being  many,  are  one  body,  so 
also  is  Christ"  (I.  Cor.  xii.  12).  "Now  ye  are  the  body 
of  Christ  and  severally  members  thereof  "(I.  Cor.  xii.  27). 
When  the  selfish  members  of  the  church  at  Corinth 
turned  the  Lord's  Supper  into  their  own  supper  (xi. 
20,  21),  they  lost  all  sense  of  "the  body."  The 
spiritual  blindness,  which  did  not  discern  the  body 
(ver.  29)  was  so  gross  a  violation  of  the  Lord's 
intention,  that  it  brought  on  the  delinquents  weakness, 
sickness,  and  death.  This  unworthy  eating  and  drink- 
ing of  the  Supper  involved  judgment,  and  made  them 
guilty  of  the  body  and  blood  of  the  Lord. 


150  THE    EARLY    CHURCH 

But  the  Supper,  properly  understood,  was  to  be  the 
pledge  of  the  inviolate  brotherhood,  in  which  the  several 
members  were  welded  together  in  Christ,  like  the  limbs 
of  a  body.  The  argument  moves  on  unbroken  from 
chaps,  xi.  17  to  xiv.  1.  In  chap.  xii.  the  diversities  of 
spiritual  gifts  in  the  one  body  are  depicted ;  the  humbler 
members  have  a  comeliness  of  their  own  in  the  body : 
indeed,  a  special  honour  is  given  to  the  more  obscure 
limbs  of  this  body  of  Christ.  But  over  and  above  all 
the  specialised  gifts,  far  more  important,  as  harmonising 
them  and  giving  them  their  place  and  their  value,  is 
love.  The  love  which  is  chanted  in  chap.  xiii.  is 
agape;  the  supernatural  quality  symbolised  by  the 
Supper,  more  important  than  any  gifts  of  utterance 
or  wisdom,  gives  value  to  what  is  thought  and  what  is 
said.  If  it  be  wanting,  speech  is  an  empty  cymbal, 
and  wisdom  ceases  to  be  wise. 

"To  halls  of  heavenly  truth  admission  wouldst  thou  win? 
Knowledge  oft  stands  without  where  love  can  enter  in." 

In  this  way  Paul  understood  the  Lord's  Supper.  It 
was  the  embodiment  of  the  new  commandment  of  love 
which  Christ  had  given  to  His  disciples.  It  is  one  of 
the  puzzles  of  the  New  Testament,  that  the  Fourth 
Gospel,  which  bestows  so  large  a  section  on  the  descrip- 
tion of  the  Supper,  the  washing  of  the  feet,  and  the 
discourses  and  prayer  of  the  Lord  at  the  table,  says 
nothing  at  all  of  the  words  of  institution.  On  the  other 
hand,  John  tells  us  that  these  discourses  emanated  from 
His  unfailing  love  to  His  own  (John  xiii.  1),  that  He  gave 
them  the   example  of  the  service  which   they  were  to 


SECOND    NOTE    OF    CHURCH     151 

render  to  one  another,  and  that  His  main  burden  was  that 
they  should  love  one  another  as  He  had  loved  them. 
Thus,  in  place  of  the  Sacrament  which  Paul  interprets  as 
brotherly  love,  John  gives  only  the  interpretation.  No 
doubt  can  be  entertained  that  the  whole  object  of  this 
institution,  on  that  last  night  before  He  was  betrayed, 
was  to  leave  a  lasting  symbol  to  represent,  and  an 
effectual  organ  to  reproduce,  that  brotherly  love  among 
His  disciples,  which  was  the  revelation  of  God  in  Christ. 
As,  then,  the  first  note  of  the  church,  the  new  good- 
ness, was  represented  by  the  water  of  baptism,  the  laver 
of  regeneration,  the  second  note  of  the  church,  the  new 
love,  was  represented  by  the  Supper.  These  two  notes 
of  the  church,  the  outward  and  visible  sign  of  the 
inward  and  spiritual  grace,  were  called  in  Greek  mysteries, 
and  in  Latin  sacraments.  In  the  New  Testament,  and 
probably  to  the  end  of  the  first  century,  the  sacra- 
ments were  subordinate  to  the  spiritual  realities  which 
they  represent.  To  be  "  buried  with  Christ  in  baptism  " 
did  not  signify  the  reception  of  the  rite,  but  the 
enlightenment,  the  inward  change,  the  new  birth, 
symbolised  by  it.  To  "eat  the  flesh  and  drink  the 
blood  of  the  Son  of  man  "  did  not  mean  to  be  partakers 
of  the  meal  which  was  held  weekly  in  the  church, 
but  to  be  by  faith  related  to  Christ,  and  to  exhibit  in 
the  community  that  unselfish  love  which  the  Supper 
symbolised.  The  primitive  conception  is,  not  that  the 
sacrament  produces  the  spiritual  result,  but  that  the 
spiritual  result  being  there,  the  work  of  the  Spirit  by 
faith  and  love,  the  sacrament  is  the  seal  and  the  sign. 
The  reversal  of  this  relation  is  Catholicism. 


CHAPTER   VII 
THE   CATHOLIC   CHURCH 

"Remember  that  Catholicism  is  the  Christianity  of  the  natural 
man." — Forsyth. 

§  i.  The  transition  from  primitive  Christianity  to 
Catholicism  is  gradual,  but  when  it  is  complete,  the 
primitive  church  has  lost  its  characteristics.  The 
Catholic  church  is  different  in  tone  and  method.  The 
notes  of  the  early  community,  "goodness  and  love,"  are 
surrendered ;  the  strange  notes  of  creed  or  organisation 
have  been  substituted.  There  is,  as  we  have  seen  all 
along,  a  Catholicism  which  is  Christian;  there  is  a 
Catholic  church  which  must  be  achieved.  But  the 
historical  Catholicism  is  a  divergence  from  Christianity, 
the  gradual  and  steady  infiltration  of  alien  ideas,  the 
degeneracy  into  forbidden  practices,  the  sure  reversal 
of  the  primitive  conceptions.  This  Catholicism  has 
had  its  day  and  failed.  For  three  centuries  it  has  been 
losing  power,  while  Christianity  has  advanced  outside 
its  borders  and  beyond  its  control.  The  idea  that  it, 
with  its  corruptions  and  its  obscurantism,  can  draw  the 
church  back  into  its  fold,  and  lead  the  world  to  a 
unity  in  Christ,  is   no  doubt  cherished  in  Rome,,  and 


THE    CATHOLIC    CHURCH       153 

is  preached  by  ardent  converts  in  England.  But  the 
idea,  if  feasible,  is  not  attractive.  A  world  governed 
by  a  new  Hildebrand,  a  church  of  to-day  like  that  of 
Innocent  III.  or  Boniface  VIII.  —  and  it  must  be 
remembered  that  the  Catholicism  of  Rome  was,  be- 
tween the  eleventh  and  fifteenth  centuries,  completely 
realised — presents  a  prospect  which  would  terrify  not 
only  all  the  scientists  and  humanists,  but  also  all  the 
spiritual  Christianity,  of  our  time.  But  prophetic  souls, 
both  within  and  without  historic  Catholicism,  have  a 
vision  of  a  new  Catholicism,  which  may,  and  indeed 
must,  come  into  being.  The  study  of  the  early  church 
is  the  best  preparation  for  the  realisation  of  that  vision. 

It  is  necessary  to  remember  that  the  development 
towards  historic  Catholicism  began  immediately  after 
the  period  with  which  we  have  been  concerned.  In 
the  second  half  of  the  second  century  Justin  Martyr 
shows  the  Supper  turning  into  a  sacrifice,  and  Irenseus 
brings  out  the  necessity  of  apostolic  succession  (iv.  26,  5), 
while  he  already  attributes  to  the  Roman  church  a 
pre-eminence  as  the  church  of  Peter  and  Paul.  During 
the  third  century  the  authority  of  the  episcopate  was 
established  by  Cyprian,  though  the  supremacy  of  Rome 
was  still  in  abeyance.  In  the  fourth  century,  Basil, 
the  Gregories,  Chrysostom  and  Jerome,  developed  the 
idea  of  the  ascetic  and  monastic  life.  At  the  beginning 
of  the  fifth  century  Augustine  saw  the  church  as  a  new 
empire,  emerging  from  Alaric's  sack  of  Rome. 

In  the  Muratorian  Fragment,  at  the  end  of  the 
second  century,  the  phrase  "Catholic  church"  means 
not  only,  as  in  Ignatius  or  Polycarp,  the  sum  total  of  the 


154  THE    EARLY    CHURCH 

churches,  but  the  orthodox  church,  in  contrast  with 
the  heretics.  That  idea  gradually  strengthened,  until 
the  Catholic  church  was  a  powerful  organisation,  with 
a  monarch  at  its  head,  which  stood  over  against  the 
Roman  empire,  as  a  successful  rival.  This  new  empire 
of  Rome  ruled  the  middle  ages,  and  was  only  broken 
by  the  great  schism  and  the  Babylonian  captivity  at 
Avignon.  When  the  Reformation  came,  at  the  begin- 
ning of  the  sixteenth  century,  the  church-empire  was 
as  worldly,  as  corrupt,  as  oppressive,  as  the  empire  of 
the  Caesars. 

But  in  the  ninth  century  the  Catholic  church  divided 
into  East  and  West.1  The  two  have  remained  in  sharp 
antagonism  ever  since.  The  Eastern  church,  while 
retaining  the  test  of  the  organisation  as  the  note  of  the 
Church,  laid  the  chief  stress  on  orthodoxy  of  creed. 
The  Western  church,  while  insisting  on  orthodoxy,  laid 
the  chief  stress  on  the  unity  of  organisation. 

It  would  not  be  true  to  say  of  either  of  these  aspirants 
to  the  claim  of  Catholicism,  that  it  has  altogether  sur- 
rendered the  Christian  ideal  of  purity  and  brotherly 
love.  But  both  have  long  ago  surrendered  these  two 
characteristics  as  the  notes  of  the  Church.     In  Catholi- 

1  Adrian  I.  anathematised  Photius,  the  Patriarch  of  Constanti- 
nople, and  Photius  anathematised  Nicholas  I.  The  final  separation 
of  the  churches  came  in  1054,  when  the  Western  church  introduced 
the  word  filioque  into  the  Creed,  declaring  that  the  Holy  Spirit 
proceeded  from  the  Father  and  the  Son.  On  this  abstract  and 
metaphysical  point  of  theology  the  Catholic  church  divided  into 
two  Catholicisms.  So  fierce  was  the  mutual  hatred,  that  when  the 
Turks  were  before  Constantinople  in  1453  the  Greeks  preferred 
Turkish  subjugation  to  reconciliation  with  Rome. 


THE    CATHOLIC    CHURCH       155 

cism,  whether  Greek  or  Roman,  immorality  is  venial 
in  comparison  with  heterodoxy.  All  kinds  of  sin  are 
tolerated  and  forgiven  freely,  so  long  as  the  sinner 
remains  within  the  pale  of  the  church.  The  ministry 
is,  as  it  were,  expressly  secured  against  the  necessity 
of  purity  by  the  dogma  that  the  ministrations  are  not 
vitiated  by  the  unworthiness  of  the  man. 

It  seems  an  incredible  distance  from  the  New  Testa- 
ment and  the  Pauline  requirement  that  the  pastor 
should  be  the  ensample  of  his  flock,  to  find  that  in 
the  Orthodox  church  the  clergy  are  allowed  to  continue 
their  ministrations  with  undiminished  authority,  though 
they  be  drunkards  and  unclean,  and  that  in  the  Roman 
church  for  many  centuries  the  vices  of  the  priesthood, 
and  even  of  the  Papacy  itself,  and  the  recurrent  corrup- 
tions of  the  monastic  orders,  though  they  have  exercised 
the  minds  of  all  devout  Catholics,  have  never  seemed 
to  cast  the  faintest  suspicion  on  the  validity  and  autho- 
rity of  "  the  Catholic  church." 

And  so  with  the  brotherhood ;  in  Catholicism  the 
laity  have  no  rights  of  government.  The  clergy  govern 
the  church ;  "  obey  the  church  "  means  that  the  layman 
must  obey  his  priest.  Brotherhood  in  Catholicism  no 
longer  means  the  community  of  Christians,  but  a  special 
community  of  those  who  have  left  the  world  to  live  in  a 
monastery,  and  are  therefore  designated  the  "  religious." 
The  beautiful  ideal  of  men  and  women,  families,  united 
as  one  family  in  the  fellowship  of  the  church,  sanctifying 
the  relation  of  marriage,  and  making  the  Christian  home, 
is  superseded  by  "  brotherhoods "  of  men  and  "  sister- 
hoods" of  women,  in  which  virginity  is  raised  to  the 


156  THE    EARLY    CHURCH 

rank  of  a  higher  virtue,  and  parenthood,  though  named 
after  God  the  Father,  is  depreciated. 

In  Catholicism  hostility  and  contempt  towards  those 
who  are  without  are  not  compensated  by  love  between 
those  who  are  within.  Not  only  are  the  laity  sharply 
divided  from  the  clergy,  but  the  secular  clergy,  or  parish 
priests,  are  in  antagonism  to  the  religious  orders.  The 
orders  themselves  are  hardly  less  hostile  to  each  other. 
The  Jesuits  are  regarded  with  suspicion  and  dislike  by 
the  rest,  though  they  have  been  the  saviours  of  the 
modern  Papacy.  The  Franciscans  and  Dominicans  have 
always  been  in  opposition,  notwithstanding  the  fraternal 
meeting  of  Francis  and  Dominic.  Rival  monasteries  of 
the  same  order  are  frequently  in  a  state  of  jealousy  and 
mutual  recrimination.1 

This  is  very  human ;  and  considering  our  infirmities, 
no  wise  man  will  bring  a  railing  accusation  against 
Catholicism  on  account  of  it.  But  the  point  to  be 
observed  is,  that  the  very  idea  of  the  brotherhood  as 
the  note,  the  mark,  of  the  church,  has  disappeared 
from  Catholicism,  just  as  the  Supper,  the  sacrament  of 
the  brotherly  love,  has  been  transformed  into  a  sacrifice 
which  is  offered  by  the  priest.  So  completely  has  the 
Pauline  conception  been  lost  that  only  a  few  eat  the 
bread  at  a  celebration,  and  only  the  priests  may  drink 
the  wine. 

Thus  we  have  the  remarkable  fact  that,  if  we  understand 
by  Christianity  the  religion  of  the  New  Testament,  the 

1  Even  at  Assisi  the  Franciscan  monastery  on  the  hill  was  at 
one  time  in  constant  feud  with  the  Franciscan  community  at  the 
Portiuncula. 


THE    CATHOLIC    CHURCH      157 

teaching  of  Christ  and  of  His  Apostles  about  Christ, 
Catholicism  is  a  departure  from,  and  even  a  direct 
contrast  to,  Christianity.  When  Catholics  avow  their 
faith  in  the  Holy,  Catholic,  and  Apostolic  Church,  they 
are  not  speaking  of  the  church  as  it  is  understood  in  the 
New  Testament,  but  of  a  vast  hierarchical,  sacramental 
organisation  to  which  the  three  epithets  can  be  applied, 
not  in  a  natural,  nor  in  a  scriptural,  but  only  in  a 
technical  and  artificial,  sense. 

When  the  Catholic  church  claims  to  be  holy,  it  does 
not  mean  that  it  will  accept  holiness  as  the  test  of  its 
claims ;  holiness  in  this  connection  is  not  the  New 
Testament  but  the  Old  Testament  idea,  a  separation 
from  the  world,  an  organ  of  supernatural  power.  In 
the  New  Testament  all  the  members  of  the  church  are 
"saints,"  t.e.  holy;  they  are  required  to  be  holy  as  God 
is  holy,  and  their  transformation  into  His  image  has 
made  them  partakers  of  the  Divine  nature,  and  so 
members  of  His  church.  But  in  Catholicism,  the  saints 
are  a  select  few,  who  for  ascetic  practices  and  devotion 
to  the  church  have  been  canonised.  So  far  from  the 
ordinary  Catholic  being  holy,  the  clergy  themselves  are 
not,  nor  are  they  even  required  to  be,  holy.  When 
Alexander  VI.  is  on  the  Papal  throne,  celebrating  in 
the  Vatican  the  marriage  of  his  natural  daughter,  Lucrezia 
Borgia,  the  church  is  as  "  holy  "  as  if  the  Pope  were  a 
saint.  The  deplorable  laxity  of  the  priesthood  in  South 
America,  for  example,  does  not,  from  the  Catholic  point 
of  view,  derogate  in  the  least  from  the  holiness  of  the 
church.  The  church  is  not,  as  in  the  New  Testament, 
holy  because  the  members  of  it  are  good ;  there  is  no 


15S  THE    EARLY    CHURCH 

ethical  test  at  all ;  it  is  only  holy  as  a  machine,  an 
instrument,  an  organisation. 

Again,  it  is  "  apostolic,"  not  in  the  sense  that  it 
imitates  the  Apostles,  teaches  their  doctrine,  or  adopts 
their  method,  but  only  in  an  artificial  sense,  viz.  that 
the  hierarchy  claims  a  dynastic  descent  from  one  of 
the  Apostles,  Peter.  The  Catholic  church  would  never 
dream  of  correcting  her  practice  or  doctrine  by  referring 
to  the  New  Testament.1  She  is  not  affected  by  Paul's 
argument,  that  we  are  justified  by  faith,  but  anathe- 
matises any  one  who  teaches  it.  She  pays  no  attention 
to  Peter  himself  when  he  forbids  the  elders  to  lord  it 
over  God's  heritage.  Thus  "  apostolic "  means  the 
direct  denial  of  the  main  ideas  and  doctrines  of  the 
Apostles,  as  we  find  them  in  the  New  Testament. 

But  Catholicism  is  not  even  Catholic.  There  are 
several  "  Catholicisms " ;  the  Eastern  and  the  Western 
denounce  each  other :  each  is  equally  sure  that  it  is  the 
one  Holy,  Catholic,  and  Apostolic  Church.  Thus  neither 
is  Catholic  in  the  proper  sense  of  the  word,  "  universal " 
and  "all  inclusive."  Catholicism  completely  repudiates 
that  Catholic  idea  which  was  quite  natural  to  Paul  when 
he  wrote  "  unto  the  church  of  God  which  is  at  Corinth, 
even  them  that  are  sanctified  in  Christ  Jesus,  called 
saints,  with  all  that  call  upon  the  name  of  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ  in  every  place,  their  Lord  and  ours " 
(I.  Cor.  i.  2).  The  millions  who  call  on  the  name  of 
our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  in  Protestant  countries,  and  ac- 
cept the  New  Testament  as  the  teaching  of  Christ  and 
the  Apostles,  Catholicism  excludes  and  anathematises. 

1  Lord  Acton's  "  History  of  Freedom,  and  other  Essays,"  p.  514. 


THE    CATHOLIC    CHURCH       159 

§  2.  Now  the  change  which  gradually  transformed 
Christianity  into  Catholicism  is  not  difficult  to  explain 
on  historic  lines.  The  alien  elements  intruded  from 
the  vanquished  Paganism  ;  the  organisation  grew  and 
strengthened  in  the  fight  against  heresy;  corruptions 
multiplied  when,  Christianity  being  adopted  as  the 
religion  of  the  empire,  emperors  as  Christian  claimed  to 
control  and  to  direct  it.  In  the  "  Church  History  "  of 
Backhouse  and  Tyler  this  process  is  traced  with  admir- 
able candour.  Milman's  "History  of  Latin  Chris- 
tianity "  carries  the  story  on  to  the  eve  of  the  Reformation. 
Every  change  is  explicable,  and  in  a  certain  sense 
reasonable. 

The  Catholic  doctrine  of  tradition,  according  to 
which  the  changes  were  all  in  the  apostolic  deposit,  pro- 
vided for  and  handed  down  from  the  Apostles  to  their 
successors,  is  an  afterthought.  But  the  continuity  of 
development  is  most  striking  and  imposing.  As  if  by 
some  inner  and  irresistible  impulse  baptism  becomes  the 
means,  instead  of  the  symbol,  of  salvation  ;  by  an  equally 
inevitable  logic  the  Supper  becomes  the  Mass.  Though 
it  requires  twelve  centuries  to  elaborate  and  formulate 
the  doctrine  of  Transubstantiation,  from  the  first  the 
elements  were  regarded  as  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ 
offered  up  as  a  sacrifice,  and  to  offer  a  sacrifice  priests  were 
necessary.  The  position  of  the  ministry  developed 
along  the  lines  of  priesthood.  The  "  bishop,"  un- 
known to  the  New  Testament,  became  the  keystone 
of  the  arch ;  the  symmetry  of  organisation  led  to  the 
logical  conclusion  of  an  episcopus  episcoporum.  When  at 
last  the  bishop  of  Rome  claimed  that  title  and  position, 


160  THE    EARLY    CHURCH 

the  fiction  of  Peter  and  the  Rock  was  cited  as  a  scrip- 
tural authority,  and  with  the  utmost  naivete  the  "two 
swords "  were  shown  to  be  the  spiritual  and  temporal 
power  entrusted  to  his  successor.  As  the  ministry,  in 
its  threefold  order,  bishop,  priest,  and  deacon,  consoli- 
dated and  culminated  in  the  Papacy,  all  the  powers 
entrusted  by  Christj  to  His  church,  as  a  brotherhood  of 
disciples,  were  appropriated  by  the  "  clergy."  By  the 
fourth  century  it  was  taken  for  granted  that  the  "  priest " 
as  such  had  the  power  to  remit  and  to  retain  sins,  in  the 
next  world  as  in  this.  As  he  claimed  to  offer  up  Christ 
on  the  altar,  and  to  "  make  Him,"  to  be  the  creator  of  his 
Creator,  and  as  he  also  claimed  to  remit  and  retain  sins 
according  to  his  will,  the  ghostly  power  of  the  priest- 
hood grew  insensibly,  until  emperors  trembled  before  it. 
The  Host,  made  and  carried  about  by  the  priests,  was 
God.  Thus  the  terrific  engine  of  sacerdotal  government 
was  developed  not  by  any  deliberate  usurpation,  but  by 
an  apparently  intrinsic  impulse  from  the  original  pre- 
suppositions of  the  religion. 

In  the  same  way  the  ascetic  and  monastic  tendencies, 
coming  in  from  Eastern  sources,  possibly  from  Buddhism, 
fastened  on  sayings  of  our  Lord,  which  required  men  to 
surrender  their  wealth  and  to  leave  the  world.  With  as- 
ceticism the  idea  of  merit  inevitably  returns.  In  the  New 
Testament  men  are  saved  by  grace,  not  by  works  lest  any 
man  should  boast.  But  from  the  time  of  Anthony,  and 
the  Egyptian  eremites,  the  idea  rapidly  took  possession 
of  the  Church,  not  only  that  the  self-denial,  mortification, 
and  austerity,  were  meritorious  for  the  salvation  of  the 
soul,  but  that  they  constituted  a  treasury  of  merit  which 


THE    CATHOLIC    CHURCH      161 

the  "  church  "  could  administer  for  the  less  meritorious 
of  her  children. 

Thus  the  disease  of  monasticism  entered  the  church, 
and  with  rapid  strides  devastated  it.  Almost  every 
Catholic  country  has  had  to  suppress  its  "religious 
orders."  England  destroyed  them  at  the  Reforma- 
tion ;  Catholic  Italy,  Spain,  and  France  have  had  to 
do  the  same  without  a  Reformation.  These  monastic 
orders,  vowed  to  poverty  and  unworldliness,  absorb 
the  land  and  the  wealth  of  the  nation  and  become 
a  peril  to  governments.  And  yet  the  whole  system 
arises  naturally  from  the  early  misunderstanding  of  the 
Gospel. 

This  development  cuts  off  the  church  from  the 
standard  and  authority  of  Scripture.  Tradition  becomes 
first  an  equal,  and  then  a  superior,  authority.  When 
once  the  development  is  left  to  take  its  own  course,  and 
the  restraint  of  scriptural  standards  is  lost,  the  church 
proceeds  to  invent  new  cults,  to  stimulate  devotion. 
By  slow  and  sure  steps  the  mother  of  Jesus  was  raised 
to  the  rank  of  Queen  of  Heaven;  she  became,  as 
"mother  of  God,"  the  intercessor  to  whom  men  must 
pray  for  interest  with  her  Son.  It  took  eighteen  centuries 
to  establish  the  point  that  she  was  born  sinless,  in  order 
to  secure  the  sinlessness  of  her  son.  But  that  point 
reached,  Catholicism  is  engaged  in  raising  Joseph  to  the 
position  of  intercessor.  For  if  Christ  obeys  His  mother 
in  heaven  from  a  sense  of  filial  devotion,  Mary  must 
obey  Joseph  from  a  sense  of  wifely  loyalty. 

Thus  new  saints  are  always  being  canonised,  and 
appealed  to,  and  images  of  them  attract  worshippers  to 

L 


i62  THE    EARLY    CHURCH 

rival  shrines,  until  under  this  Christian  guise  the  old 
paganism  and  polytheism  are  restored. 

Given  a  spiritual  doctrine  like  Christianity,  entering 
into  conflict  with  the  world,  assimilating  ideas  Jewish 
and  Pagan,  religious  and  political,  from  its  environment, 
and  gradually  losing  the  pure  and  transcendent  elements 
which  belonged  to  it  at  the  beginning,  there  is  little 
difficulty  in  explaining  the  transformation  of  Christianity, 
with  its  spiritual  idealism  and  its  ethical  purity,  into 
Catholicism  with  its  political  ambition  and  its  ethical 
numbness. 

But  there  is  a  difficulty  which  is  both  perplexing  and 
harrowing  to  faith.  How  is  this  perversion,  distortion, 
degradation,  to  be  reconciled  with  the  promise  of  Christ 
in  the  Gospel  that  He  would  be  with  His  own  to  the 
end  of  the  world  ?  How  can  we  conceive  the  presence 
and  working  of  the  Holy  Spirit  in  the  church  which 
sacrifices  holiness  to  power,  elects  men  without  holiness 
as  governors  and  directors  of  her  affairs,  and  constantly 
lags  behind  the  truth  and  the  morality  of  the  age  in 
which  she  lives  ? 

The  reconciliation  needed  will  not  be  found  except 
in  that  great  principle  of  Jesus,  that  we  must  judge  not 
according  to  appearances,  but  judge  righteous  judgment ; 
that  the  kingdom  of  heaven  is  not  of  this  world,  and 
comes  not  with  observation ;  that  God  estimates  things 
in  an  inward  and  spiritual  way. 

When  the  New  Testament  is  closely  considered  there 
is  much  to  show  that  such  mistakes  as  have  been  made 
would  be  made.  Christ  Himself  foretold  defections ; 
the  Apostles  drew  the  most  vivid  pictures  of  the  egotism 


THE    CATHOLIC    CHURCH      163 

and  ambition  which  would  invade  the  church ;  Paul 
declared  that  the  mystery  of  iniquity  was  already  at 
work  in  his  day. 

Thus  the  progress  of  Christianity  is  to  be  sought,  not 
in  the  organisation  of  the  church,  which  may  easily 
be  an  error,  a  usurpation,  a  worldly  power  endeavouring 
to  exploit  Christ  and  His  truth,  but  in  the  spiritual 
movements  which  go  on  through,  and  in  spite  of,  these 
exterior  things. 

Christ  may  be  present  with  the  faithful  few  gathered 
in  His  name  everywhere  and  in  every  age,  and  may 
deliberately  withdraw  from  a  corrupt  Curia,  and  a  throne 
where  a  weak  and  guilty  man  poses  as  His  vicegerent. 
The  Holy  Spirit  may  be  at  work  in  society,  in  move- 
ments of  thought,  in  poetry,  painting,  and  the  nobler 
aspirations  of  humanity,  at  the  very  time  when  the  self- 
styled  church  has  resisted,  grieved,  or  even  quenched 
the  Spirit. 

In  other  words,  it  may  be,  and  indeed  is,  the  very 
genius  of  the  New  Testament  to  seek  the  expansion 
of  the  kingdom  of  God,  not  in  the  pretentious  and 
hypocritical  schemes  of  man,  but  in  the  human  heart, 
in  love,  and  faith,  and  hope. 

Thus  the  holy,  Catholic,  and  apostolic  church  in  which 
we  believe  will  not  be,  cannot  be,  that  corrupt  and 
ambitious  government  which  sits  on  the  seven  hills,  nor 
any  other  system,  Greek,  Coptic,  ^Ethiopic,  Anglican, 
but  that  vast  fellowship  of  souls  who,  being  really 
holy,  form  the  one  desirable  society,  and  are  therefore 
Catholic,  and  are  apostolic  because  they  "continue 
stedfastly  in  the  apostles'  teaching  and  fellowship,  in  the 


1 64  THE    EARLY    CHURCH 

breaking  of  bread  and  the  prayers  "  (Acts  ii.  42)  as  at 
the  beginning. 

If  only,  with  the  New  Testament  in  our  hands,  we 
can  reach  and  occupy  this  standpoint,  hope  is  renewed, 
and  a  great  possibility  opens  before  the  mind.  If  the 
corruptions  and  mistakes  have  not  obliterated  the  original 
principles  of  the  church ;  if  the  Head  of  the  church  is 
in  the  Spirit  still  present,  and  has  always  been ;  though 
centuries  may  seem  to  have  been  lost,  the  impulse 
which  was  at  the  beginning  is  always  here,  and  may 
move  again  to  more  fruitful  results.  Averting  our  eyes 
from  the  church  as  a  visible  institution,  and  looking 
exclusively  at  Christ  and  His  activity  in  the  world,  pro- 
longed through  centuries,  and  never  more  manifest  than 
to-day,  we  may  perhaps  maintain  that  His  true  church 
has  never  been  divided ;  always  it  has  been  one  body, 
viz.  His.  Though  the  living  stream  has  flowed  through 
the  desert,  and  has  often  seemed  to  be  lost  in  the  sand 
and  in  the  ruins,  the  source  is  unexhausted,  and  pours  out 
its  waters  still.  Only  let  us  go  back  to  the  original  ideas, 
seek  the  primal  power,  accept  the  intrinsic  tests ;  only  let 
this  idea  be  presented  to  the  men  of  this  or  any  age,  and  a 
regeneration  of  the  church  may  begin. 

"  Can  time  undo  what  once  was  true? 
Yet  we  would  follow  Thee." 

§  3.  And  while  we  thus  lay  hold  of  the  principle 
of  reconstruction  or  regeneration,  we  may  be  able  to 
recognise  that  the  centuries  have  not  really  been  lost. 
Catholicism,  if  in  its  working  out  an  error,  a  cor- 
ruption,   a    decline,    has    in    its    magnificent    purpose 


THE    CATHOLIC    CHURCH      165 

produced  ideals  which  must  not  be  allowed  to  perish. 
The  idea  of  unity  itself  is  Christ's  own  :  His  purpose 
was  that  His  followers  should  be  one,  as  He  and  the 
Father  are  one.  The  idea  of  continuity,  a  succession 
from  age  to  age,  a  widening  out  of  doctrine,  a  building 
up  from  precedent  to  precedent,  the  identity  preserved 
through  change,  is  so  harmonious  with  the  principle  of 
all  human  development,  that  it  must  appeal  with  force 
to  thinkers,  especially  to  thinkers  brought  up  in  the 
doctrine  of  evolution.  The  idea — it  was  St.  Augustine's 
— of  the  church  as  a  city  of  God,  replacing  the  Roman 
empire  which  had  fallen  by  the  irruption  of  the  Goths,1 
was  the  most  magnificent  which  has  ever  come  to  the 
mind  of  man.  A  spiritual  government,  presiding  over 
the  nations,  an  arbiter  in  their  disputes,  a  teacher  of 
heavenly  truth,  uniting  and  harmonising  the  races,  the 
politics,  the  philosophies,  of  mankind,  is  a  dream  so 
noble  that  we  cannot  but  look  with  wonder  and  rever- 
ence on  the  great  men,  St.  Leo,  St.  Gregory,  Hilde- 
brand,  who  conceived  it  and  wrought  for  centuries  to 
give  it  an  actual  embodiment. 

And  while  the  ideas  of  unity,  continuity,  and  autho- 
rity are  a  priceless  heritage,  Catholicism  has  preserved 
other  treasures  which  we  can  ill  afford  to  spare.  From 
the  days  of  St.  Anthony  and  the  Egyptian  eremites, 
through  the  austerities  of  Basil  and  Chrysostom  and 
Jerome,  and  then  in  the  ideals  of  the  great  monastic 
founders,  Benedict,  Francis,  she  held  aloft  the  Cross, 
the  idea  of    unworldliness,   renunciation,   self-sacrifice. 

1  Alaric  entered  Rome  in  a.d.  410. 


166  THE    EARLY    CHURCH 

Sanctity  was  a  superiority  to  the  indulgence  of  the 
flesh,  to  the  sway  of  appetite,  or  to  the  seductions  of 
ambition.  The  church  was  extended,  heathenism  was 
vanquished,  Christ's  purpose  was  fulfilled  by  a  series 
of  missionaries,  who  were  martyrs ;  Patrick  in  Ireland, 
Columba  in  Scotland ;  Columbanus,  Ulfilas,  and  Adalbert 
in  Germany;  a  host,  whose  names  cannot  be  numbered, 
won  Europe  to  Christ  by  dying  or  by  sacrificing  every 
comfort  and  pleasure.  That  the  Cross  can  only  be  truly 
preached  by  our  being  crucified  with  Christ,  was  the  idea 
of  Catholicism  which  gave  it  its  power  and  extension  in 
all  its  fruitful  ages. 

Then  Catholicism  created  and  preserved  the  idea  of 
theology  as  a  body  of  revealed  truth  which  must  be 
kept  untainted,  and  defended  at  all  costs  against  the 
perversion  and  corruption  of  heresy.  There  is  a  truth  of 
God ;  that  truth  is  declared  by  God ;  it  is  committed  to 
faithful  men,  and  is  to  be  communicated  to  the  world, 
which  needs  it  for  its  salvation ;  that  is  the  noble  side  of 
Catholic  theology,  which  must  be  remembered  when  we 
are  studying  the  dismal  history  of  the  councils  and  the 
heresies  and  the  Inquisitions. 

And  the  Catholic  cultus  or  worship  is,  or  at  any  rate 
once  was,  the  most  powerful  attraction  ever  devised  by 
man  for  drawing  whole  populations  to  worship,  to  re- 
cognise God,  to  obey  spiritual  laws.  Into  this  service 
from  early  times  all  the  arts  were  impressed.  Archi- 
tecture built  shrines  like  St.  Sophia  at  Constantinople, 
or  St.  Mark's  at  Venice,  which  awed  the  beholder  with 
mystery,  and  ravished  him  with  beauty.  Music  was 
brought  into  the  worship  of  God ;  it  was  converted  and 


THE    CATHOLIC    CHURCH      167 

became  spiritual ;  great  composers  were  elicited  by  the 
yearning  of  the  church  to  express  her  praise.  At  first 
Gregory  confined  the  expression  to  the  simplest  tunes 
and  harmonies;  but  the  rapture  could  not  brook  con- 
finement ;  and  seeking  all  modes  of  expression,  it  wrought 
out  that  greatest  of  all  distinctively  Christian  arts, 
modern  music. 

The  image  worship  was  and  is  an  abuse.  One  council 
condemned,  and  another  restored  it.  To-day  Catholics 
defend,  while  Protestants  condemn  it.  But  about  one 
point  there  is  complete  agreement.  The  Catholic  de- 
mand for  pictures  in  worship  created  the  modern  art  of 
painting.  First  it  produced  those  marvellous  mosaics 
which  still  move  the  soul  to  ecstasy  in  St.  Mark's,  or  in 
St.  Apollinaris  at  Ravenna.  Then  it  elicited  Duzzio  and 
Cimabue,  Giotto,  and  the  glorious  succession  of  Italian 
painters.  From  the  gli'ipses  of  country-sides  through 
the  windows  of  chambers  in  which  the  Madonna  held  her 
Babe  the  art  of  landscape-painting  grew.  Turner  is  -in 
this  way  a  remote  and  unexpected  result  of  Catholicism. 

Thus,  confining  our  attention  for  the  moment  to  the 
noble  and  beautiful  side  of  Catholicism,  we  gather  a 
harvest  of  great  ideas  which  are  of  the  essence  of  the 
Gospel,  which  we  cannot  be  wrong  in  attributing,  if  not 
to  the  Jesus  of  history,  at  least  to  the  Christ  of  God. 
Catholicism  holds  before  our  eyes  the  conception  of  a 
Christianity  which  is  one  for  all  mankind  and  can  hold 
all  mankind  in  one;  a  body  of  Divine  truth,  which, 
living,  develops  with  the  ages,  absorbs  all  new  dis- 
coveries, and  teaches  men  the  way  of  God  ever  more 
perfectly ;   a    worship   which,   celebrated    at    a   million 


168  THE    EARLY    CHURCH 

shrines,  may  yet  be  one  in  its  idea  and  method  and 
end ;  a  worship  which  unites  all  classes  and  all  sorts  of 
men  by  touching  at  once  the  intellect  and  the  heart, 
the  aesthetic  sense,  and  the  will.  It  ever  holds  in  its 
heart  as  the  ideal  of  sanctity,  a  noble  renunciation,  a 
sacrifice  of  self  in  the  service  of  humanity,  a  complete 
surrender  of  the  individual  will  to  God. 

§  4.  But  if  the  great  Catholic  idea  is  to  be  realised, 
two  things  are  absolutely  essential :  first,  to  recognise 
where  the  mistake  was  made  in  the  historical  attempt 
to  realise  it,  which  has  manifestly  failed  ;  second,  to 
grasp  afresh  the  truth  which  always  contains  within 
itself  both  the  ideal  and  the  promise  of  its  realisation. 

(1)  The  mistake  was  of  early  origin  and  of  consistent 
growth.  It  is  not  an  error  which  crept  in  later  owing 
to  the  slow  corruption  of  time.  But,  as  Paul  said,  the 
mystery  of  iniquity  was  already  at  work  in  the  apostolic 
age  itself  (II.  Thess.  ii.  1-12).  In  the  second  half  of 
the  second  century,  as  we  have  seen,  we  find  in  Justin 
Martyr  the  Lord's  Supper  shaping  towards  the  Mass ; 
in  Irenaeus  we  hear  the  first  suggestions  of  the  authority 
of  Rome ;  in  the  third  century  Cyprian  has  elaborated 
the  extreme  view  of  episcopal  authority,  and  the  relics 
of  saints  and  martyrs  are  objects  of  superstitious  venera- 
tion ;  in  the  fourth  century  the  Gregories  and  Basil  and 
Chrysostom  and  Jerome  exhibit  the  fanatical  asceticism, 
the  scorn  of  marriage,  the  hatred  of  heretics,  which 
gradually  eliminated  mercy  and  humanity  from  the 
ecclesiastical  heart.  In  the  fifth  century  Leo  practically 
founds  the  Papacy ;  and  though  at  the  end  of  the  sixth 
century  St.  Gregory  still  concedes  to  the  Patriarchs  of 


THE    CATHOLIC    CHURCH      169 

Alexandria  and  Antioch  a  certain  equality  with  the 
bishopric  of  Rome,  we  may  say  that  the  papal  claims 
are  established,  defended  by  forged  documents,  and 
accepted  by  half  Christendom,  before  the  schism  be- 
tween the  East  and  the  West. 

What  was  the  mystery  of  iniquity?  What  was  the 
error  which  transformed  the  church  of  the  first  century 
into  that  mass  of  corruption  and  pollution  which  in 
the  ninth  century  seemed  to  be  a  perfect  travesty  of 
the  Christian  church  ?  So  far  as  we  can  interpret  the 
mysterious  allusions  of  St.  Paul  in  II.  Thess.  ii.,  we 
gather  that  it  was  the  spirit  of  worldly  domination,  the 
priestly  hankering  to  lord  it  over  the  Lord's  heritage, 
the  substitution  of  an  ecclesiastical  tyranny  for  the 
decaying  Roman  empire.  A  seer  like  Dante  attributed 
the  fall  of  the  church  to  the  patronage  of  the  Emperor 
Constantine.  The  emperor  became  the  head  of  the 
church,  summoning  and  controlling  councils,  dictating 
the  terms  of  orthodoxy.  But  the  more  serious  fall 
came  when  the  Pope  took  the  place  of  emperor,  and 
endeavoured  to  govern  and  coerce  the  church  by  the 
imperial  methods.  When  Innocent  III.,  at  the  begin- 
ning of  the  thirteenth  century,  organised  a  military 
crusade  to  exterminate  all  the  Protestants  who  had 
come  into  being  during  the  middle  ages,  the  mystery 
of  lawlessness  was  complete.  What  was  begun  in  the 
Spirit  was  made  perfect  in  the  flesh.  The  kingdom  of 
God,  which  Jesus  preached,  i.e.  the  reign  of  God  in 
the  hearts  of  men,  had  become  a  kingdom  of  this  world, 
a  tyranny,  with  a  despot  at  its  head,  who  no  longer 
attempted  to  reign  by  Christ's  methods,  or  in  Christ's 


170  THE    EARLY    CHURCH 

spirit,  but  employed  the  ordinary  means  of  earthly 
governments  to  convert  and  to  coerce  souls. 

Sacerdotalism  is  the  instrument  which  this  usurping 
power  instinctively  uses  to  retain  its  hold  of  men.  The 
celibate  priest  is  cut  off  from  the  joys  and  interests  of 
family  life,  and  seeks  his  satisfaction  in  the  power  of 
the  church,  which  employs  him  as  an  instrument. 
Every  corruption  of  Catholicism  springs  from  the 
attempt  to  weld  the  fetters  of  priestly  influence  and 
power.  In  Christianity,  as  we  saw  it  issuing  from  the 
mind  of  Christ  through  the  Apostles,  there  was  and 
could  be  no  priesthood.  But  so  soon  as  the  idea  of 
the  priesthood  was  adopted  from  Judaism  or  Paganism, 
the  effort  of  the  church  was  directed  to  subject  the 
"laity"  to  the  "clergy."  The  Lord's  Supper  was  made 
a  sacrifice,  that  the  priest  might  be  necessary  to  offer 
it.  Purgatory  was  invented,  that  the  priest  might  hold 
the  keys  and  administer  the  terrors  or  relief  of  that 
visionary  realm.  The  priest  created  his  Creator  on  the 
altar  ;  the  priest  locked  or  unlocked  the  door  of  heaven. 
The  confessional  was  devised,  to  place  the  secrets  of 
all  hearts  into  the  hands  of  the  priest.  And  the 
casuistry  which  destroys  morality  was  devised  to  meet 
the  necessities  of  the  confessional. 

To  maintain  the  power  of  the  priest  over  the  laity, 
it  was  necessary  to  keep  the  Bible  out  of  the  hands 
of  the  people ;  for  the  most  humble  reader  of  the 
New  Testament  could  not  but  see  that  there  was  no 
Mass,  no  priest,  no  confessional,  and  no  purgatory 
there. 

But,  as  the  Bible  was  taken  from  the  Christian,  it 


THE    CATHOLIC    CHURCH      171 

became  necessary  to  entertain  the  mind  with  other 
devotions,  worships,  and  intercessions.  To  take  the 
place  of  the  Bible,  and  of  Christ,  the  Virgin  Mary  was 
elevated  to  a  divine  position  in  heaven,  and  treated  as 
the  mediator  between  men  and  her  Son.  Though 
St.  Bernard,  the  last  of  the  Fathers,  regarded  the  idea 
of  her  immaculate  conception  as  a  heresy,  because 
Christ  and  Christ  alone  was  born  without  sin,  the 
worship  of  Mary  rapidly  and  inevitably  filled  the  mind 
of  the  church.  As  Mary  was  an  ecclesiastical  creation, 
fancy  and  dogmatic  necessity  might  paint  her  portrait 
and  exploit  her  authority  at  will.  The  saints,  and  even 
their  relics,  pilgrimages,  sacred  hearts,  scapularies,  and 
the  endless  novelties  of  Catholicism,  down  to  the  fic- 
tions of  Loreto  and  the  extravagances  of  New  Pompeii, 
are  devices  to  fill  the  mind  and  heart  of  people  who 
are  cut  off  from  the  Scriptures.  The  habitual  use  of 
the  Bible  would  shatter  the  whole  system. 

But  if  we  are  right  in  diagnosing  the  error,  ancient 
and  deep-rooted  as  it  is,  we  may  hope  to  see  the  day 
when  it  will  be  recognised  and  renounced.  The 
amazing  success  of  the  Reformation,  which  established 
Protestantism  in  all  the  progressive  nations  of  Christen- 
dom, showed  clearly  that  God  did  not  mean  to  leave 
the  church  for  ever  in  her  corruption.  That  great 
movement  was  but  a  harbinger  of  the  Reformation 
which  is  yet  to  be. 

Luther  and  his  fellow-workers  moved  in  the  dark, 
or  at  least  in  the  shadow;  they  resisted  the  more 
obvious  abuses  of  Catholicism,  but  they  did  not  strike 
at   the    root.      The   effort   of  the   Reformers,   Luther, 


172  THE    EARLY    CHURCH 

Calvin,  Zwingli,  Knox,  was  to  set  up  a  purified  Catholic 
church  over  against  the  corrupt  church  of  Rome.  But 
the  time  had  not  come,  the  materials  were  not  at  hand, 
for  going  back  to  the  sources,  for  finding  the  genuine 
religion  of  Jesus,  and  for  bringing  it  to  bear,  as  a 
reforming  and  regenerating  spirit,  on  the  whole  church, 
and  indeed  on  the  whole  world. 

The  only  effect  of  the  Reformation  of  the  sixteenth 
century  was  to  set  Protestantism  over  against  Catholi- 
cism and  to  represent  Catholicism  as  the  enemy.  But 
Catholicism  is  not  the  enemy ;  it  is  the  misguided  way 
in  which  Catholicism  has  been  worked  out,  that  is  the 
enemy ;  in  a  word,  as  Gambetta  said,  little  realising  the 
far-reaching  truth  of  his  aphorism,  Clericalis?ne  c'est 
Vennemi. 

Catholicism  is  a  noble  idea,  the  greatest  that  ever 
visited  the  heart  of  man.  It  animated  and  inspired 
Paul  and  Augustine,  no  less  than  Leo  and  Gregory. 
But  Leo  and  Gregory  adopted  the  mode  of  realising  it 
which  was  ultimately  subversive  of  it.  It  is  the  mis- 
taken method  of  realising  Catholicism  which  has  to  be 
combated.  It  is  the  Catholicism  in  which  Protestantism 
and  Catholicism  can  be  merged,  which  has  to  be 
realised. 

(2)  II  fant  reculer  pour  sauter.  We  must  go  back  to 
the  original,  and  recover  the  fundamental  ideas,  the  ideas 
which,  being  those  of  Christ  and  His  apostles,  made 
Christianity.  We  must  bring  everything  to  the  criterion 
of  those  fundamental  ideas,  and  correct  everything  by 
them.  We  must  lay  the  whole  stress  upon  the  essen- 
tials, and  courageously  clear  away  the  accretions,  which 


THE    CATHOLIC    CHURCH     173 

are  not  only  unessential,  but  obscuring  to  what  is 
essential. 

Our  study  may  guide  us  to  the  right  conclusion. 
When  the  idea  of  God  in  the  New  Testament  is  made 
plain  and  paramount,  as  the  infinite  love  and  wisdom  of 
Fatherhood  ;  and  when  the  work  of  Jesus  is  interpreted 
by  that  idea,  and  harmonised  with  it ;  we  cannot  but 
reach  the  conclusion,  that  the  church  is  the  society  of 
those  who  believe  in  Him,  and  that  the  notes  of  that 
society  are  two,  viz.  goodness  and  love.  The  "  Holy, 
Catholic,  and  Apostolic  Church  "  acquires  a  new,  and 
yet  its  original,  meaning.  It  is  the  society  of  the  good ; 
its  holiness  is  goodness,  likeness  to  Jesus  Himself.  It  is 
Catholic  in  the  sense  of  covering  all  races,  all  lands,  all 
ecclesiastical  organisations  ;  in  the  sense,  too,  of  holding 
the  one  creed,  the  creed  of  goodness  and  of  brotherhood. 
It  is  apostolic,  because  it  returns  to  the  ideas  of  the 
Apostles,  and  finds  in  their  writings  the  norm  of  religion. 

Speaking  broadly,  the  Eastern  Church  made  ortho- 
doxy of  creed  the  test  of  the  church.  It  produced  a 
blind  fury  against  heretics.  It  drove  Chrysostom  and 
Nestorius  alike  into  exile.  Eutyches,  the  opponent  of 
Nestorius  in  one  council,  was  himself  marked  as  a 
heretic  in  the  next.  The  church  fell  into  violent 
factions  on  the  question  whether  in  Jesus  there  were 
two  natures  or  one.  Duophysite  and  Monophysite 
fought  each  other  more  bitterly  than  faith  fought  in- 
fidelity. And  the  "orthodox"  church  fell  an  easy 
victim  to  the  victorious  onslaught  of  Mahomet.  In  that 
dark  age  of  contention  for  what  was  supposed  to  be  the 
faith  once  for  all  delivered  to  the  saints,  the  eye  rests 


i74  THE    EARLY    CHURCH 

with  relief  only  on  an  individual  here  and  there  who 
retained  the  spirit  of  goodness  and  of  love.  The  hope 
for  the  future  was  not  in  Athanasius  or  Cyril  or  even 
Augustine,  but  in  such  a  character  as  Timotheus  Salo- 
phaciolus.  He  was  Patriarch  of  Alexandria  in  460  and 
in  477.  His  gentleness  and  moderation  secured  tran- 
quillity in  distracted  times.  A  Duophysite  himself,  he 
protected  the  Monophysites,  and  refused  even  the 
Emperor  Basilicus  commanding  him  to  coerce  the 
heretics.  The  Monophysites  would  call  to  him  in  the 
streets  of  Alexandria :  "  Although  we  have  no  church 
fellowship  with  thee,  yet  we  love  thee." 

The  Western  church,  on  the  other  hand,  made  the 
unity  of  the  organisation  the  test  of  orthodoxy.  Rome 
has  been  tolerant  of  everything  so  long  as  implicit 
obedience  is  yielded  to  her  authority,  easily  tolerant  of 
moral  turpitude,  and  inclined  to  exalt  as  a  virtue  the 
fierce  fanaticism  which  hounds  to  death  those  who 
refuse  obedience.  The  motto  of  ancient  Rome  was 
adopted  as  that  of  the  Roman  church — 

"  Parcere  subjectis,  et  debellare  superbos." 

This  Western  Catholicism  has  for  many  centuries 
absolutely  dismissed  goodness  and  brotherhood  as  the 
marks  of  the  church.  The  sole  mark  of  the  church 
is  the  unity  of  the  see  of  Peter.  To  her  no  goodness 
is  of  any  value,  no  love  is  recognised  as  Christian, 
apart  from  absolute  submission  to  the  Pope. 

But  the  Catholicism  of  the  Orthodox  church,  and 
the  Catholicism  of  the  Roman  church,  implacable 
enemies  to  one  another,  are  decaying  before  the  eyes 


THE    CATHOLIC    CHURCH     175 

of  the  modern  world.  And  in  the  bosom  of  the 
Western  church,  at  any  rate,  a  new  thought  is  at  work ; 
the  light  of  truth  and  love  is  breaking  in. 

Protestantism  obtained  the  first  glimpse  of  the  dawn. 
It  at  least  saw  that  mediaeval  Catholicism  did  not 
realise  the  idea  of  Christianity.  It  re-established  the 
ethical  test,  and  set  its  sails  towards  brotherhood.  But 
it  must  be  owned  that  Protestantism  for  the  most  part 
fell  into  the  fundamental  error  of  Catholicism.  Luther- 
anism  and  Calvinism  alike  established  orthodoxy  in 
a  creed.  Anglicanism  has  established  orthodoxy  in 
submission  to  the  unity  of  Canterbury.  Thus  the 
actual  churches  of  Protestantism  have  become  paler 
and  milder  reflections  of  the  Eastern  or  the  Western 
Catholicisms.  But  Protestantism  has  this  great  advan- 
tage, which  will  be  the  salvation  of  the  future :  it  has 
the  Bible.  It  can  turn,  and  is  always  turning,  to  the 
springs  of  the  faith  in  the  life  of  our  Lord  and  in  the 
writings  of  His  Apostles.  And  yet  Protestantism  will 
never  vanquish  Catholicism,  nor  will  Catholicism  ever 
recover  Protestantism  into  its  stereotyped  and  artificial 
unity. 

But  if  we  have  studied  the  early  church  to  any 
purpose,  and  have  caught  the  meaning  of  the  historic 
development  of  these  Christian  centuries,  we  may 
cherish  the  firm  conviction,  and  work  towards  its  realisa- 
tion, that  Christianity,  like  a  swelling  tide,  will  yet  rise 
and  overflow  Catholicism  and  Protestantism  alike, 
merging  them  in  a  far  better  and  purer  Catholicism 
than  has  yet  been  conceived.  Goodness  and  love 
are  stronger  forces   than    the    orthodoxy   of  the   East, 


176  THE    EARLY    CHURCH 

or  the  authority  of  the  West ;  for  they  are  of  God. 
God  is  goodness,  God  is  love.  Christianity  -was  the 
breaking  in  of  this  sublime  truth  into  humanity.  It 
was  first  the  declaration  and  then  the  demonstration 
that  God  is  goodness  and  God  is  love.  It  was  there- 
fore the  means  by  which  men  could  become  good 
and  learn  to  love  one  another  with  a  pure  heart  fer- 
vently. 

If  we  recover  that  truth,  if  the  world  as  a  whole 
discovers  it ;  if  the  church,  or  the  churches,  consent 
to  be  tested  by  it,  and  to  conform  to  it ;  if  faith  in 
Christ  is  identified  with  the  conduct  and  character  of 
Christ,  and  if  orthodoxy  is  estimated  by  the  principle 
of  I.  Cor.  xiii. ;  if  the  modes  of  organisation  are  recog- 
nised as  secondary,  and  surrendered  or  modified  directly 
they  do  not  conduce  to  goodness  and  love;  if  the 
breath  of  the  Spirit  passes  over  Christendom  and  turns 
the  thought  of  all  towards  the  one  desirable  result, 
the  church  which  is  the  bond  of  humanity  and  the 
sacred  expression  of  man's  union  with  God ;  we  shall 
see  the  true  Catholic  church  emerge,  or,  shall  we  not 
say,  descending  out  of  heaven ;  the  tabernacle  of  God 
will  be  among  men ;  the  church  of  the  future  will 
fulfil  the  promise  of  the  church  at  the  beginning,  when, 
by  Peter's  confession  it  issued  out  of  the  Unseen  into 
the  Seen,  and  the  Lord  declared  that  the  gates  of 
the  Unseen  should  not  prevail  against  it. 


INDEX 


Acts,  29 

Agapi,  83,  132,  140,  149 
Allen,  11,  124 
Angels  of  churches,  63 
Apocrypha,  6 

Aposties,  32,  43,  69,  158,  173 
in  the  Did  ache,  81 

,,       in  Clement,  86 

,,       in  Hernias,  58 

, ,       and  the  New  Test. ,  102 
Augustine,  153,  165 

Babylon,  127 
Backhouse,  159 
Baptism,  31,  53,  83,  97,  112 
Barnabas,  Epistle  cf,  93 
Basil,  153 
Bishops,  34,  41,  159 

,,      the  same  as  elders,  63 
,,      in  the  Didachi,  82 
,,      in  Clement,  86 

monarchical,  in  Ignatius, 
88,  &c,  100 
,,      in  Hermas,  98 
Brotherhood,  93,  147 

,,  the  Second  Note  of 

the  Church,  129, 
Sec. 

Catholicism,  14,  77, 90,  92,  151, 

152-176 
Celibacy,  117 
Christ-traffickers,  82 
"Church"     in     Old     Test.,     i, 

&c. 


Church,"  Jesus'  use  of  the  word, 
8 
His  new  idea,  12,  30 
the  first,  23 
modelled  on  the  syna- 
gogue, 25 
in  Acts,  29 
in  the  plural,  37 
in  the  house,  41 
development,  74 
in  Clement,  86 
the  soul  cf  the  world, 

95 
autonc  my  of  local,  142 
Eastern,  154 

Clement  of  Rome,  85 

Clergy,  135,  155 

Communism,  34,  97 

Confession,  52,  115 

Cremer,  132 

Cultus,  44,  67,  84,  96,  166 

Cyprian,  19,  153 

Deacons,  36,  41,  63.  65,  67,  83 
Deaconesses,  66 
Development,  56 
Diognetus,  94-96 
Discipline,  50,  115 
Durell,  80,  90,  99 

Ecclesia  in  Old  Test.,  2,  93 
Elders,  40,  64,  92 
Episcopacy,  monarchical,  63 
Eutyches,  173 
Evangelical  view,  14 
177  M 


i78 


INDEX 


Fasting,  83 
Fellowship,  33,  46,  49 
Franciscans,  156 

Galen,  iio 
Goodness,  95,  157 

,,  the  First  Note  of  the 

Church,  105,  &c 
Grace,  doctrine  of,  120 
Gregory,  St. ,  20,  165,  168 
Gregory  of  Nyssa,  153 
,,        Nazianzum,  153 

Harnack,  70,  107,  112,  143 

Hegesippus,  37 

Hernias,  96 

Hildebrand,  165 

Hippolytus,  101 

Hort,  F.  J.  A.,  56,  65,  69,  72 

Ignatius,  63,  88-90 
Immorality  tolerated,  155 
Innocent  III.,  169 
Irenasus,  101,  153 

Jerusalem,  13,  36 

,,  Church  of,  114 

Jesus,  His  morality,  106,  123 
Jesuits,  108,  156 
Joseph,  cult  of,  161 
Justification  by  faith,  119,  158 
Justin  Martyr,  101,  153 

Leo,  St.,  165,  168 
Luther,  171 

,,       contemplated  Congrega- 
tionalism, 144 

Marcionites,  25 
Mariolatry,  161,  171 
Matt.    xvi.    17:    11-39,    52,    75, 
97 


Matt.  xvi.  18 :  16,  52 

,,      xviii.  15-17  :  22 
Milman,  159 
Ministry,  42 
Missionaries,  70,  127 
Monasticism,  160 
Morality,  51 
Muratorian  Fragment,  153 

Nestorius,  173 

New   Testament,  60,  64,  71,  79, 
101,  170 

Ordination,  72 

Painting,  167 

Paul,  38,  47,  71,  114,  128 

Peter,  as  first  Pope,  15,  17,  57 

Philadelphia,  130 

Plato,  132 

Polycarp,  91 

Popes,  18,  58,  77,  157 

Priests,  34,  68-73,  9i.  94.  99.  136. 

160,  170 
Prophets,  35,  44,  99 
Proseuche",  26 
Protestantism,  171-175 
Purgatory,  170 
Purity,  109,  116 

Qahal,  2,  6-8,  25,  61 

Reformation,  the,  21 
Revolution,  French,  145 
Rome,  Church  of,  85,  88,  96, 128, 
135.  174 

Sacraments,  68,  96,  151 
Schiirer,  26,  27 
Singing,  34,  68 
Slavery,  146 
Smith,  Robertson,  85 


INDEX 


179 


Sub-apostolic  literature,  79,  99 
Supper,    the   Lord's,  33,  46,   81, 

83,  148,  156,  170 
Synagogue,  3,  27,  &c. ,  50,  99,  130 

"Teaching  of  the  Twelve," 

64,  67,  79,  81-85 
Theology,  166 

Timotheus  Samophaciolus,  174 
Timothy  and  Titus,  62,  71 


Tongues,  speaking  with,  45 
Tradition,  56,  161 
Transubstantiation,  159 
Truth,  108 

Wealth,  iio 

Wernle,  37 

Widows,  66,  91 

Women  in  churches,  117,  146 

Wright's  "Synopsis,"  9,  22 


Printed  by  Ballantyne,  Hanson  &  Co. 
Edinburgh  &>  London 


